Drink driving cases collapse on foot of garda evidence

TWO gardaí received a harsh lesson in the District Court in Gorey last week after they saw drink driving cases collapse on the foot of the evidence they presented to the judge.

Firstly, Garda David Shannon gave evidence in the case of Catherine Byrne (62) of Moonshadow, Kilquade, Co Wicklow.

He told the court that he followed behind the defendant’s Jaguar and that she was driving ‘erratically’ and was ‘all over the road’ crossing the white line on a number of occasions. When he pulled her over, he said there were four dogs loose in the car, two of which were sitting on Ms Byrne’s knee. He said he got a strong smell of alcohol from the defendant and her words were slurred, he told the court.

He said she was disorientated and ‘nearly fell’ when asked to step out of the car. Ms Byrne, he said, was brought back to Enniscorthy Garda Station, where she was unable to provide a breath sample. A doctor was called for to take a blood or urine sample and it later returned a reading of 250mg of alcohol per 100ml of blood.

When the prosecution’s case had concluded, barrister Martin Dully immediately pointed out that no evidence had been given that the defendant was told that she had been arrested or that it had been explained to her in simple language.

Judge Haughton was therefore forced to dismiss the case.

The next case followed a similar pattern and involved a Padraic Leacy (26) of 27 Coolbawn, Ferns.

Garda Sean Lenihan gave evidence that he was conducting an alcohol checkpoint at Summerhill, Enniscorthy, at 1.30 a.m. on March 18 last when he was approached by the defendant driving a Volkswagen Polo. He said that Mr Leacy failed the roadside breath test and was arrested and brought to the station where he returned a reading of 60/100.

When Garda Lenihan finished giving his evidence, and having witnessed what happened in the previous case, solicitor Gerry Flynn asked Judge Haughton to ensure that Inspector Mark Foley did not ask any ‘ leading questions’.

Inspector Foley took exception to this and Mr Flynn explained: ‘I would always be of the opinion that the prosecution should not get a second bite at the cherry’.

Judge Haughton pointed out that the prosecution were entitled to ask questions as they had not finished. Inspector Foley asked three questions, finishing with: ‘Did you tell the defendant in plain language why he was being arrested?’ Garda Lenihan replied that he had.

Mr Flynn immediately erupted from his seat, stating that this was exactly the kind of leading question he had asked to be mindful of.

‘ This is completely unacceptable,’ Mr Flynn said. ‘It was a leading question.’

The Inspector defended himself, stating that he had asked three questions, before Judge Haughton replied: ‘ To my mind, it would have been more appropriate to put the question in a different way, such as asking what the garda had said, as opposed to phrasing it in a way that told the witness what the issue was. Again there was no evidence that the defendant was told that they were being arrested or the reason for their arrest. I have a huge difficulty with that.’

Judge Haughton suggested that maybe the case could be adjourned to be heard by another judge, but Mr Flynn strongly objected to this saying that the evidence given would undoubtedly be different the second time around.

The judge conceded that there was a ‘ huge gaping gap’ in the evidence given. He also pointed out that he believed there was ‘no malicious intent’ on behalf of Inspector Foley to lead the witness, but that he had effectively told him what to say.

Judge Haughton said he was left with no choice but to dismiss the case.

‘I think we’ve all learned some important legal issues today,’ said Judge Haughton.