Hurler jury: 'What's the next step if we're not unanimous?'
At Ennis Circuit Court, just before 5pm yesterday, Judge Francis Comerford sent the jury home to come back today and 'make a fresh start of it'.
The jury deliberated for two hours and 47 minutes before returning with a question for the judge yesterday at 4.51 pm. Hurler Niall Gilligan. Pic: INPHO/Cathal Noonan
The jury foreman asked: 'What is the next step if we are not unanimous?', to which the judge replied: 'There are various procedures which can kick in if juries are not unanimous, but they can only be taken at various points.
'It is always preferable that you try to reach a unanimous verdict – that is the idea, and it is better than any alternative. At 4.50 pm, I think it is appropriate that you break for the day and come back tomorrow [today] and make a fresh start of it.'
He said if the jury is still not unanimous in its verdict after a while today, the position can be reviewed.
Mr Gilligan, 48, of Rossroe, Kilmurry, Sixmilebridge, Co. Clare, denies assault causing harm with a stick to a then 12-year-old boy at the Jamaica Inn hostel, Sixmilebridge, on October 5, 2023. Hurler Niall Gilligan. Pic: INPHO/Cathal Noonan
In his charge to the jury, Judge Comerford directed that if they are satisfied beyond all reasonable doubt that the first encounter between Mr Gilligan and the boy that led to the force being applied commenced and started outside the Jamaica Inn rather than in the corridor of the building, then they can't consider the lawful use of force as a defence.
He also said that in the defence of self-defence, they should consider if the accused honestly believed he had to use force for the purpose of protecting himself from an assault or damage to his property. He said if the answer is 'no', the self-defence defence is no longer available.
He said that if the answer is yes, then was the force used by the accused reasonable and necessary in the circumstances as he saw them? If the answer is 'yes' to that question, he said, 'then you must acquit'. 'If no, it wasn't reasonably necessary, well then he is guilty of the offence,' he added.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
4 hours ago
- Irish Times
Nikita Hand to sue Conor McGregor and two former neighbours over withdrawn claims in failed appeal
Nikita Hand has initiated new legal proceedings against Conor McGregor and two people previously due to give evidence in his failed appeal against the outcome of a civil rape case Ms Hand won against him last November. The High Court action was filed on Thursday, shortly after the Court of Appeal dismissed the MMA fighter's appeal. The three-judge Court of Appeal, in a unanimous judgment, dismissed all grounds of the appeal . Ms Hand, accompanied by friends and supporters, was in court for the ruling. Mr McGregor was not present. Ms Hand is now suing Mr McGregor, Samantha O'Reilly and Steven Cummins for damages. Mr McGregor had claimed that fresh evidence provided by Ms O'Reilly and Mr Cummins bolstered his insistence he was not responsible for bruising on Ms Hand's body following the alleged assault in December 2018. The fresh evidence included sworn statements from Ms O'Reilly and Mr Cummins, who lived across the road from Ms Hand in Drimnagh, Dublin in late 2018. In an affidavit sworn last January, Ms O'Reilly claimed she had witnessed, from her home, a physical altercation between Ms Hand and her then partner Stephen Redmond in their home on the night of December 9th/10th, 2018. In an affidavit, Ms Hand described her neighbours' claims as lies and said Mr Redmond never assaulted her that night or at any time during their relationship. The application to admit the neighbours' evidence was dramatically withdrawn by Mr McGregor's side at the outset of the appeal on July 1st. The court granted Ms Hand's lawyers application to have the matter referred for consideration of possible perjury, including possible induced perjury by Mr McGregor. Last November, a High Court jury found Mr McGregor had assaulted Ms Hand and awarded her almost €250,000 in damages. In the appeal court judgment on Thursday, Mr Justice Brian O'Moore, sitting with Ms Justice Isobel Kennedy and Mr Justice Michael McGrath, said the jury had to decide in essence between Mr McGregor's description of 'a rather tawdry episode' and Ms Hand's claim a criminal offence had been committed against her. The court dismissed all grounds of the appeal including a claim Mr McGregor's side was deprived of the right of an effective cross-examination in relation to the availability of expert reports. The court also ruled Ms Hand was entitled to costs, at the highest solicitor-client level, of the last-minute withdrawal, in what Mr Justice Brian O'Moore described as 'mysterious' circumstances, of two motions brought by Mr McGregor seeking to have fresh evidence admitted.
Irish Times
5 hours ago
- Irish Times
State seems to be suggesting even people of means should apply for legal aid, barrister for Diarmuid Phelan tells court
The State appears to have suggested that even people of means should make legal aid applications, which a barrister for law professor Diarmuid Phelan has argued is 'entirely contrary' to the spirit of the scheme. A judge will give her ruling in September as to whether the State should pay the 'enormous' legal costs for Mr Phelan following a trial that ended last January. Mr Phelan was acquitted by a Central Criminal Court jury of murdering a trespasser on his farm. The costs issue was raised on Thursday evening, on the last day of the Trinity term, before Ms Justice Siobhan Lankford. Law lecturer Mr Phelan, who has assets valued in the millions, instructed two senior and two junior counsel at his trial and did not receive legal aid. He also called expert witnesses who gave evidence following the close of the prosecution case. READ MORE Mr Phelan (56) went on trial in October 2024 after he pleaded not guilty to murdering Keith 'Bono' Conlon (36), a father of four, at Hazelgrove Farm, Kiltalown Lane, Tallaght, Dublin 24 on February 24th, 2022. Mr Phelan is a barrister, law lecturer and farmer who owns Hazelgrove, formerly a golf course. Opening the application on Thursday evening, Sean Guerin SC, who was one of two senior counsel representing Mr Phelan at his trial, told Ms Justice Lankford that the starting point - and also expressly the most important consideration - in awarding costs was the verdict. Counsel submitted Mr Phelan was entitled to his costs and the onus was really on the prosecution to show why he shouldn't succeed in the application. Mr Guerin said one of the prosecution's submissions was that Mr Phelan had the option of applying for legal aid but had chosen not to do so. The barrister said the State appeared to be suggesting that even people of resources should make a legal aid application, which he suggested was a complete misunderstanding of what the scheme was. Opposing the application, John Byrne SC, for the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), argued there was no presumption in favour of costs and one cannot simply say they had been acquitted so were entitled to their costs. He said a more complex and nuanced inquiry was required by the trial judge. Ms Justice Lankford asked both parties to articulate their views if she decided to award Mr Phelan his costs but confined it to legal aid costs. She noted there was quite a wide discretion in case law, where 50 per cent of costs had been awarded to applicants. Mr Guerin told the judge there was no warrant for doing so as those weren't the costs his client had incurred. He said legal aid was not a guide or a measure as to what are the appropriate costs in a case. Mr Byrne said the discretion seemed to be very wide and awarding legal aid costs was not something the court couldn't do, provided it set out the basis for it. Ms Justice Lankford said she hoped to deliver the court's judgement in September.
Irish Times
6 hours ago
- Irish Times
‘They ruined me': Natalie Ennis, tortured in Dublin flat, still awaits psychiatric support
A woman who is still waiting for psychiatric support after being falsely imprisoned and tortured for three hours in a Dublin flat last September has said her life has been 'ruined.' Natalie Ennis was taken to a flat in Henrietta House in Dublin 7 over a false accusation about missing drugs. The 38-year-old spent three weeks in hospital having suffered a broken eye socket, broken cheekbone, broken nasal bone, broken elbow, burns, dislocated teeth, bruising and lacerations across her head and scalp, among other injuries. She was discovered by gardaí who arrived at the flat by coincidence to execute a warrant. READ MORE 'I thought they were coming for me, because the neighbours would have heard me screaming,' she said, speaking on RTÉ's Prime Time on Thursday night. 'I never thanked police so much in my life, because if they hadn't come through the door that day, I was dead.' Throughout the three-hour ordeal, Ms Ennis was subjected to 'truly barbaric' violence, said Judge Pauline Codd, who imposed sentences for the five men ranging from 8½ to 14 years on Wednesday. 'They really ruined and stripped my life away from me. It took everything from me,' Ms Ennis said. She is still waiting for psychiatric support some 10 months after the ordeal, saying she needs 'a lot of help'. 'They ruined me, I just kind of need help, that's why I'm waiting on psychiatrists and stuff like that,' she said. Ms Ennis, who thought she was going to die in the flat, does not believe she will ever be able to live normally. 'I can't get on any public transport, I can't go near the city centre. I'm just going to my local shops and back every day and that's still a fright. I'm still looking over my shoulder,' she said. 'When I sleep, I get night terrors, very bad night terrors and sometimes I urinate myself,' she said. Ms Ennis was beaten with metal poles, burned with a makeshift blowtorch, cut with a knife, kicked and punched, had her hair cut off and was threatened with rape. The men took running jumps at her during the assault , threatened to make her drink ammonia and threatened to go to her teenage daughter's school and rape her. Describing the pain as 'unbearable', she said: 'It was just pure evil what they done to me.' 'I had staples in my head leaving hospital as well. I can't remember how many, but it was a good lot from the hatchet being stuck in my head,' she said. 'I can't feel that side of my face.' She hopes to move on for her daughter 'but I don't think that's going to happen, it'll always be in my head,' she said.
