Why jury had to return to the court just one hour into deliberations
AS she discharged the jury on Monday evening, Judge Melanie Greally had urged the seven men and four women to be ‘fearless’ and decide if the water protest, which allegedly trapped former tánaiste Joan Burton, was peaceful or violent.
Summarising both the defence and prosecution’s cases, the judge urged the jury to set aside any ‘natural sympathies’ they might have towards the accused men’s predicament.
But while the jurors began deliberating on their verdicts at 3pm on Monday, there was an unexpected twist an hour later when they were warned they would have to pause in their work.
Immediately after the jury was sent out, Seán Guerin SC, counsel for Paul Murphy, told Judge Greally that he wished to raise a number of points regarding her directions to the jury.
Among these was his complaint that she had said that violence was not a requirement for the charge of false imprisonment, but was an important factor in the context of the case. Mr Guerin had argued that his client was not violent, and that he could not be held responsible for the violence of others.
He felt the judge had misrepresented the case, he said.
But Judge Greally said she had ‘nailed her colours to the mast’ regarding violence, and that she would not be changing her charge in that respect.
However, she did agree to make 18 tweaks to her charge, to reflect points which Mr Guerin, and defence counsel for the other five accused, felt should be included in the interests of balance.
Their arguments were made over the course of Tuesday, and were responded to by Seán Gillane SC, counsel for the prosecution.
On Wednesday, Judge Greally asked the jurors to return and said she wished to revisit her charge to them. She told jurors that they should not draw any adverse inferences from the fact that none of the accused gave evidence.
With regard to Mr Murphy, she said that in his defence, he had always maintained that he’d sought to end Ms Burton’s restraint, and had openly disagreed with those who sought to restrain her. This was inconsistent with guilt, the defence maintained.
Judge Greally said the jurors must make their own assessment of his intentions.
The judge said another defendant, Michael Murphy, had also claimed to have acted peacefully, and to have promoted peaceful acts, and that his defence team said this was inconsistent with an intent to falsely imprison Joan Burton.
Judge Greally told the jurors that they must regard video evidence as the ‘best and most reliable’ evidence before them, adding that it had formed the ‘lion’s share’ of the case.
She said that if the jury decided that the protest was violent, this did not mean that the accused were guilty – the jurors still had to decide if the accused participated in Ms Burton’s false imprisonment, and what their intent had been.
And she said the jury must ask questions concerning the role of the gardaí, whether they determined the protest to be peaceful or violent.
She said the lack of statements taken from people at the protest who were not before the court could be taken into account when considering the fairness of the investigation, and whether there was any Garda agenda, particularly against TD Paul Murphy.
The jurors should consider whether the slow progression of the Garda 4x4 containing Ms Burton along Fortunestown Road could be considered an escape route from any restraint, the judge said.
And she said the prosecution had conceded that if the jury decided there was no false imprisonment of the two women in the unmarked Garda car to which they were first taken then its case fell at the first hurdle. The jury would not then have to consider the later events on Fortunestown Road.
Judge Greally also took the jury through evidence given during the cross-examination of witnesses, which she had omitted from her initial summary. This included the alleged leadership role of the accused, the credibility of prosecution witnesses, the adequacy of policing, and the issue of whether gardaí had an agenda.
Following her further points, the jury resumed its deliberations at 12.45pm on Wednesday before returning unanimous verdicts of not guilty after just three hours and ten minutes of deliberations.
Deafening cheers and shouts of ‘No way, we won’t pay’ rang out in court as the six men accused of falsely imprisoning former tánaiste Ms Burton were unanimously cleared of all charges by a jury.
The yells of support built to a crescendo as trial judge Melanie Greally told the men, including Solidarity TD Paul Murphy and
Agreed to tweaks to charge Deafening cheers rang out
two local authority councillors, that they were ‘free to go’.
As they left court, fists held in the air in triumph, defendant Michael Banks said the investigation had been ‘designed to punish those who fought against the water charges’.
‘It was an attempt to criminalise the largest movement of people power in decades, and present a sit-down protest as false imprisonment,’ he said.
A tense hush had fallen over the Dublin Circuit Criminal Court as, after their hours of deliberations, the jury returned with its verdict for the protesters, who had argued that they had a civil right to peaceful protest.
As TD Mr Murphy stood to hear his fate, the registrar read: ‘You say that the accused, Paul Murphy, is not guilty?’
More than 100 supporters erupted in loud cheers, many of them crying, as the jury forewoman confirmed that they did, and that had also acquitted South Dublin county councillors Michael Murphy and Kieran Mahon, Frank Donaghy, Michael Banks and Scott Masterson.
Charges against a seventh man, Ken Purcell, were dropped at an earlier stage in the trial.
The six men applauded the jury from the dock, while their supporters gave a standing ovation, and high-fived the jurors seated to the side of the jury box.