Brothers accused of wielding machete and pitchfork in daylight feud attack
James Dinnegan (25) and Patrick Dinnegan (21) were brought before a sitting of Athlone District Court
These are the smiling two brothers who stand accused of pouncing on the home of an elderly woman suffering from dementia armed with a machete and pitchfork in an 'ongoing and violent' internal family feud that has left a midlands town on a knife-edge.
James Dinnegan (25) The Green Bun Daire, Kinnegad, Co Westmeath and Patrick Dinnegan (21) Woodland Park, Dundalk, Co Louth were brought before a sitting of Athlone District Court in connection to an incident on Tuesday afternoon that saw a four man gang target a family home in Mullingar.
The pair were arrested and charged with producing a machete and pitchfork during the course of a dispute respectively at McCurtain Street, Mullingar, Co Westmeath in 'full view of the public' and as part of the latest feuding rivalry to hit the midlands town in recent months.
Patrick Dinnegan (21) was charged with producing a pitchfork during the course of a disturbance in Mullingar on Tuesday afternoon.
Garda Ken Shedwell detailed how both men were arrested as gardaí responded to reports a public disturbance that had broken out at Mill House, a two storey property that was home to the alleged victim, Lucy Dinnegan and her elderly mother.
During the course of a lengthy and contested bail hearing, Garda Shedwell said it will be contended a four man gang, three of whom had their faces covered with snoods, arrived at the scene in the middle of the afternoon while being armed with a cache of weapons.
Garda Shedwell said the State will allege how both men exited a white Opel Insignia at around 4.30pm and almost instantaneously began issuing menacing threats to Ms Dinnegan's family.
The court was told how the incident had formed part of an 'ongoing and violent' feud involving 'multiple members' of the wider Dinnegan family in what gardaí maintained was a 'clear threat to public order and safety' in Mullingar.
CCTV footage taken from three alternate vantage points outside the Dinnegan household showed the suspect white coloured Opel pull up where three males can be seen jumping out wielding weapons.
James Dinnegan (25) was charged with producing a machete during a violent episode in Mullingar which saw a four man gang arrive at a house in the midlands town in broad daylight armed with weapons.
Garda Shedwell said it was the gardaí's firm belief Patrick Dinnegan was one of those individuals who was armed with a pitchfork while sporting a blue tracksuit and black snood in order to cover his face.
Judge Owens was told gardaí were also satisfied Patrick's older sibling, James had been among that group with his face being identified on CCTV by investigating gardaí while brandishing a machete.
A third video clip taken from a Facebook Live video which gardaí allege was filmed by James Dinnegan sitting in the front passenger seat of the Opel Insignia was similarly played in open court.
Its contents featured a stream of shouts and high pitched heckling, one of which included the taunt: 'Come out now, you stupid b******.'
Garda Shedwell said the incident would have been witnessed by a string of Lucy Dinnegan's immediate family, including a number of young children who were inside the house at the time of the attack.
Patrick Dinnegan was banned from entering Mullingar with the exception of bona fide legal appointments and court appearances.
It was further revealed how the episode played out across from a local SuperValu store and as several parents were attempting to bring their own children to a nearby GAA match.
'Lucy Dinnegan stated the suspects made physical and verbal threats,' said Garda Shedwell, stating how it will be alleged James Dinnegan embarked on making a series of hand gestures.'She expressed genuine fear for her safety and the safety of her family.'
The court was told how gardaí were firstly objecting to Patrick Dinnegan's bail under both O'Callaghan Rules and Section 2 of the Bail Act 1997.
Garda Shedwell said the basis for those objections were due to the seriousness of the charges under section 11 of the Firearms and Offensive Weapons Act which, upon conviction on indictment carries a maximum tariff of five years in prison.
James and Patrick Dinnegan outside Athlone Courthouse.
News in 90 Seconds - May 25th 2025
He said a further strand to the State's application was grounded on the nature of the evidence investigating gardaí had already garnered, among which included allegations Patrick Dinnegan was spotted wearing the same clothing barely 30 minutes after the attack while his older brother was allegedly found in possession of a black snood which had featured in the earlier CCTV footage.
Judge Owens was informed of the 'serious concerns' senior garda investigators harboured over fears of witness interference involving Patrick Dinnegan in an 'ongoing feud' that had the potential to escalate even further.
There were objections outlined in terms of James Dinnegan under O'Callaghan Rules, much of which centred on eight bench warrants which had been issued for his arrest in recent times.
James and Patrick Dinnegan outside Athlone Courthouse.
Taking the stand himself, the latter detailed how his own battles with mental health had resulted in him spending 'two to three days' in St Loman's Hospital.
Under cross examination from Sgt Orla Keenan as to why he had not followed through on recommendations from his GP to begin psychiatric appointments, Mr Dinnegan replied: 'I would rather keep my mental health to myself as I don't like talking about it to be honest.'
In defence, Mark Cooney said both his clients should be granted bail for a myriad of reasons.
In terms of Patrick Dinnegan, he said there was a presumption of innocence that could not be overlooked allied to a 'certain vagueness' that surrounded where the incident had taken place with both McCurtain Street and Canal Avenue having been put forward in open court.
James Dinnegan was granted bail subject to a litany of strict conditions.
Mr Cooney also argued there was a distinct lack of evidence concerning supposed witness interference, an inconsistency which had been borne out by the fact the State's chief witness Lucy Dinnegan was not present to give evidence.
In switching his focus to James Dinnegan, Mr Cooney said the State's sole argument for resisting his client's liberty because of eight previous bench warrants was simply not enough to force the court into imposing a custodial remand.
Judge Owens granted both men bail subject to a number of strict conditions. In remanding the pair on their own cash bail of €500 each, she compelled them to obey a 9pm to 8am curfew and to have no contact either directly or indirectly with Lucy Dinnegan and her immediate family.
The pair were also ordered to stay off all social media platforms, to obey sign on conditions and to stay out of Mullingar with the exception of designated court appearances and documented legal appointments. James Dinnegan was, meanwhile, granted a minor relaxing of the latter to enter Mullingar but only for authentic GP and community mental health appointments.
Other conditions included directions for both men not to apply for travel documentation or leave the jurisdiction and to provide a mobile number to gardaí.
Having signed both of their bail bonds, Judge Owens remanded Patrick Dinnegan on bail to a sitting of Mullingar District Court on June 26 with his older brother ordered to return before the same court two weeks later on July 10.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sunday World
3 days ago
- Sunday World
Man jailed for hospital bomb threat calls judge a ‘f**king scumbag' in outburst
On being led by away, he shouted at Judge Finnegan: 'Fifteen f****** months for that? You're a f****** scumbag, Judge. You're a dead man Judge A man in his 50s who was jailed for a total of 15 months for threatening to have Cavan General Hospital 'blown up' launched a blistering attack on a District Court judge as he was being led away from court, telling him: 'Fifteen f****** months for that? You're a f****** scumbag, judge. You're a dead man judge, you are a f****** dead man.' Ciaran Brady (52) Aghatoten, Tullyvin, Cavan aimed the sinister threat at Judge Raymond Finnegan moments after he sentenced him for an incident last October that resulted in patients having to be transferred to other hospitals and gardaí having to roll out additional patrols in and around the Lisdarn campus. Brady, who went into custody on May 1 this year, pleaded guilty to the episode alongside three other public order related offences that occurred within three days of one another towards the end of April. Brady, likewise tendered a guilty plea to making 'numerous calls' to gardaí on April 24 this year during which he vowed to smash the windows of Cootehill Garda Station unless officers came to arrest him. Ciaran Brady News in 90 Seconds - May 31st Sgt Damien Galligan, for the State, said when gardaí approached and spoke to the accused, he told them after caution: 'I was going to smash the place up, only for you to arrest me. You were lucky you got here in time.' That came four days after the Cavan man was arrested when he was found standing in the middle of a road at Tullvin Village in Cavan and acting in an 'aggressive manner' while 'shouting at passing vehicles'. In between both those incidents, Brady was arrested and charged with using threatening, abusive or insulting behaviour along Cootehill's Market Street. Sgt Galligan said when gardaí spoke to the accused at around 8:30am that morning, he suddenly became abusive to officers and shouted: 'F*** you, you c*** garda, go fuck yourselves. I will do something to get arrested, go f*** yourself.' The court was told as gardaí escorted Brady to a garda van, he threatened one of the arresting officers' wife and family. In outlining what Judge Finnegan ultimately described as 'far and away the most serious' offence, Sgt Galligan told of how a female volunteer from the Samaritans received a phone call on October 22, 2024 from an unidentified male, pledging that Cavan General Hospital would be 'blown up the following morning'. The court heard how gardaí, together with hospital management were forced to enact a string of contingency measures, among which included the transferral of a number of patients to other hospitals alongside extra patrols being rolled out by senior garda bosses. Sgt Galligan said in the aftermath of the incident, detectives quickly identified Brady as a potential suspect even though he was in custody at the time. Judge Finnegan was told staff in Castlerea confirmed Brady had access to a phone at the time of the call and that it came from Castlerea Garda Station. In defence, Damien Rudden said his client, in pleading guilty to all charges before the court, was someone who suffered from schizophrenia. He said Brady had tendered those pleas at the 'first available opportunity' and was back taking his medication since going into custody at the beginning of May. Judge Finnegan, in delivering sentence, branded the charges as 'serious', saying their continuity had caused 'huge disruption' to gardaí and other agencies. He subsequently sentenced Brady to three months for the threat to cause criminal damage to Cootehill Garda Station, backdating it to May 1. Further sentences of three months and nine months were issued for one of the public order charges and the hoax call respectively, both of which were directed to run consecutively. The remaining charges, Judge Finnegan announced, would be taken into direction, as he confirmed Brady's sentencing had resulted in a total of 15 months being handed down. That sparked a furious outburst from Brady as he unleashed a foul-mouthed attack in the direction of the bench. On being led by away by prison officers, he shouted at Judge Finnegan: 'Fifteen f****** months for that? You're a f****** scumbag, Judge. You're a dead man Judge, you are a f****** dead man.'
Sunday World
4 days ago
- Sunday World
How Richard Satchwell's defence made last ditch attempt to get jury discharged
REVEALED | He was found guilty by a jury of murdering his wife Tina and burying her under the stairs where she lay for six and a half years. Richard Satchwell (centre) leaving the District Court in Cashel, Co Tipperary, after being charged in connection with the murder of Tina Satchwell (Brian Lawless/PA) The move was resisted by the State, who pointed out that much of the publicity was generated by Satchwell himself. In November last year Brendan Grehan SC, for Satchwell, said that as the media attention was concentrated in Cork, it would be "impossible to retain an impartial jury" there who had not heard of the case and formed "adverse views of Mr Satchwell". Mr Grehan said that most trials can be held in local venues but some generate media attention that can be "macabre" and lead to "greater hostility than it is possible to imagine in an ordinary case." Satchwell's preference, Mr Grehan said, was for the trial to be held in Limerick so it would be closer to the prison where he was being held. "He has a position of responsibility there, which enables him to be a productive prisoner," counsel told the court. Gerardine Small SC, for the Director of Public Prosecutions, opposed the change of venue, arguing that publicity around the case was national, not local. Also, she said, much of that publicity was generated by Satchwell who "sought the attention of the media" by appearing on radio and television shows. Richard Satchwell (centre) leaving the District Court in Cashel, Co Tipperary, after being charged in connection with the murder of Tina Satchwell (Brian Lawless/PA) News in 90 Seconds - May 30th Ms Small pointed to Satchwell's appearances on RTE's 'Prime Time', TV3's 'Ireland AM', the Ray D'Arcy Show and the numerous interviews he gave to journalists. She added: "It is an unusual factor that it [the media attention] can be attributed to the accused man while he was aware the body of his wife was buried where it was." Mr Justice Paul McDermott agreed to change the venue to Dublin, due to the significant risk of an unfair trial. He said: "The high degree of local coverage and engagement with the case takes it out of the ordinary". "SOMEWHAT OF A SIDE SHOW: TWEETS AND CHARGINGS" During the trial and in the absence of the jury, Mr Grehan applied to exclude Satchwell's "cryptic" reply of "Guilty or not guilty, guilty" when he was formally charged with the murder of Tina on October 13, 2023. Counsel said a second part of the application - which was "somewhat of a side show" - was connected to the fact that a member of the press - Paul Byrne, formerly of Virgin Media News - tweeted that Satchwell was going to be charged before gardai had actually done so. He said Superintendent Anne Marie Twomey had received directions from a legal officer at 7.28pm to charge Satchwell with the murder of his wife and he was formally charged at 8:07pm on October 13. Mr Grehan said Mr Byrne had tweeted at 8.03pm that "a man in his 50's had been charged with the murder of Tina Satchwell" - four minutes before his client was formally charged. Counsel said Michael O'Toole, of The Irish Daily Mirror and Irish Daily Star, had "retweeted" at 8.09pm from the handle @mickthehack that "Richard Satchwell had been charged with the murder of his wife". A number of gardai who were called to give evidence in the voir dire denied that they had contacted anyone in the media but accepted that Mr Byrne had tweeted about it several minutes in advance and that Mr O'Toole had named Satchwell as being charged two minutes after it occurred. Mr Grehan said it was "implicit" that contact was made with a number of people in the media "to enable them to do their job". Counsel also submitted that Satchwell should have been informed that he could consult with his solicitor before the charging process took place and was entitled to legal advice "at this critical juncture". "It vitiated the process and the court should not permit the fruits of the charging to be now available to the prosecution," he added. He said the defendant's solicitor Eddie Burke had left the garda station at 7.07pm that evening and didn't arrive back until 8.10pm - three minutes after the charging took place. Read more The lawyer said his client's reply after caution was more prejudicial than probative and would create difficulties in terms of how the jury could be properly directed. In reply, Ms Small said Satchwell, who was interviewed by gardai on ten separate occasions, had a "full appreciation of his entitlement not to say anything" in reply to the caution and was acutely aware of this. The defence, she said, was claiming there is an entitlement to have a solicitor present on charging and she wasn't aware of any such entitlement. She said the entitlement was to legal advice, which Satchwell had received "in abundance". She called the media tweets "completely irrelevant". In his ruling, Mr Justice McDermott said the defendant's reply was fully voluntary and found that the absence of a solicitor in the garda station had not impaired the fairness of the process. He refused to exclude the reply to charge. DIRECTION TO REMOVE MURDER CHARGE FROM INDICTMENT When the prosecution's case was at an end, Mr Grehan applied to the judge to withdraw the charge of murder against his client, submitting there was no evidence of an intention to kill or cause serious injury, which he said was "a huge lacuna" in the State's case. "It is one of the elements of the offence of murder which the prosecution have to adduce evidence of, which they have singularly failed to do," he argued. He said Assistant State Pathologist Dr Margaret Bolster couldn't give a cause of death due to a very long post mortem period and had confirmed there were no broken bones in Tina's body. He said she wasn't able to conclude anything about the state of the organs due to the lapse of time. Mr Grehan said there was an explanation available to the jury as to how death was caused in the case without the evidence of the pathologist or anthropologist and that explanation was given by his client, where Satchwell said the belt of Tina's bathrobe had been held up against her neck until she collapsed. Counsel said this was the only account available as to what happened to Tina and was of "immense importance" as there was no evidence of violence discovered in the post mortem. Counsel said it was significant that Tina's hyoid bone was un-fractured. He said there was also no medical evidence to say that his client's account of holding Tina off with a restraint against her neck before she collapsed suddenly was not possible. In reply, Ms Small submitted that there was "a wealth of evidence" from the surrounding circumstances in the case from which intent could be inferred. Counsel said the deception began on March 20, 2017 very shortly after Satchwell killed Tina and the plethora of lies were an acknowledgement of guilt. Ms Small said a limited post mortem examination was conducted because the defendant had buried his wife in a manner to ensure the cause of death wasn't available. She added: "There is also motive on his own account, Satchwell says she is threatening to leave him. She has wasted 28 years of her life, that is all part of the evidence for the jury to accept or not". Mr Grehan said the lies told were not sufficient to show intent for murder. Referring to motive, he said there was also clearly a basis for which Tina might have wanted nothing further to do with her husband and attacked him in that manner. In his ruling, Mr Justice McDermott said Satchwell's immediate response was to create a false impression that Tina was alive and he had taken every conceivable step to protect himself. He said Satchwell told lie after lie "to any journalist who'd indulge him" and portrayed a scenario that his wife had deserted him suddenly without any explanation. Mr Justice McDermott said Satchwell had shown a degree of malevolence towards his wife and the defendant was totally focused on protecting himself from discovery. There had been, he said, a period of six prolonged years before Tina's body, of which Satchwell had disposed of, was found and this was relevant to the issue of intention. He said it was a matter for the jury as to whether Satchwell had formed the requisite intent and whether he was guilty of his wife's murder. He rejected the application to withdraw the murder charge. APPLICATION TO DISCHARGE THE JURY At the very end of the trial, when Mr Justice McDermott had finished charging the jurors, Mr Grehan said on foot of instructions from his client he "regrettably" had to seek the discharge of the jury Counsel voiced his opposition to the tone of the charge, which he said was intended to "nudge" the jurors towards a guilty verdict. Counsel said he became increasingly concerned as the charge proceeded that it was not resembling a charge but a "second prosecution speech" in terms of the emphasis the court was placing on the State's case to the detriment of the defence. Mr Grehan told the judge he had not put the defence case in full at all to the jury. He said the two separate tasks of directions on the law and a summary of the evidence had become "intermingled" and submitted there was no balance in what had been said to the panel. "The whole emphasis of what was said to the court seemed to be to reiterate the prosecution case," he argued. Mr Grehan said the facts of the case "shouted and screamed for themselves" in terms of what Satchwell did and didn't do. "They are not facts that need to be nudged or pushed for the jury in any particular way". Counsel said it was beyond remedy at this stage and the court should discharge the jury. Ms Small called Mr Grehan's application "wholly inappropriate", describing the charge as balanced, fair and extremely comprehensible. "The criticism is unfounded, a court will rarely outline all the evidence, that is a matter for the jury". In his ruling, the judge said this was a difficult case in which to sum up the evidence for the jury and he didn't accept that his charge was "so wildly unbalanced". He disagreed that the absence of references to certain parts of the evidence in any sense justified the jury being discharged. Mr Justice McDermott refused the application but did give the jury further directions in relation to two matters of which complaints were made, one relating to the detailed evidence of Lorraine Howard concerning her half sister Tina, the other to evidence that Satchwell loved or was "besotted" with his wife.
Irish Examiner
4 days ago
- Irish Examiner
Satchwell guilty of murder: Here's what the jury didn't hear
TRIAL MOVED TO DUBLIN Richard Satchwell's trial was initially scheduled to sit in his home county of Cork but, due to the "intense publicity" surrounding the case, his lawyers applied late last year to move the trial to the capital. The move was resisted by the State, who pointed out that much of the publicity was generated by Satchwell himself. In November last year Brendan Grehan SC, for Satchwell, said that as the media attention was concentrated in Cork, it would be "impossible to retain an impartial jury" there who had not heard of the case and formed "adverse views of Mr Satchwell". Mr Grehan said that most trials can be held in local venues but some generate media attention that can be "macabre" and lead to "greater hostility than it is possible to imagine in an ordinary case." Satchwell's preference, Mr Grehan said, was for the trial to be held in Limerick so it would be closer to the prison where he was being held. "He has a position of responsibility there, which enables him to be a productive prisoner," counsel told the court. Gerardine Small SC, for the Director of Public Prosecutions, opposed the change of venue, arguing that publicity around the case was national, not local. File picture: Collins Courts Gerardine Small SC, for the Director of Public Prosecutions, opposed the change of venue, arguing that publicity around the case was national, not local. Also, she said, much of that publicity was generated by Satchwell who "sought the attention of the media" by appearing on radio and television shows. Ms Small pointed to Satchwell's appearances on RTÉ's Prime Time, TV3's Ireland AM, the Ray D'Arcy Show and the numerous interviews he gave to journalists. She added: "It is an unusual factor that it [the media attention] can be attributed to the accused man while he was aware the body of his wife was buried where it was." Mr Justice Paul McDermott agreed to change the venue to Dublin, due to the significant risk of an unfair trial. He said: "The high degree of local coverage and engagement with the case takes it out of the ordinary." 'SOMEWHAT OF A SIDE SHOW: TWEETS AND CHARGINGS' During the trial and in the absence of the jury, Mr Grehan applied to exclude Satchwell's "cryptic" reply of "Guilty or not guilty, guilty" when he was formally charged with the murder of Tina on October 13, 2023. Counsel said a second part of the application - which was "somewhat of a side show" - was connected to the fact that a member of the press - Paul Byrne, formerly of Virgin Media News - tweeted that Satchwell was going to be charged before gardaí had actually done so. He said Superintendent Anne Marie Twomey had received directions from a legal officer at 7.28pm to charge Satchwell with the murder of his wife and he was formally charged at 8:07pm on October 13. Mr Grehan said Mr Byrne had tweeted at 8.03pm that "a man in his 50's had been charged with the murder of Tina Satchwell" - four minutes before his client was formally charged. Counsel said Michael O'Toole, of The Irish Daily Mirror and Irish Daily Star, had "retweeted" at 8.09pm from the handle @mickthehack that "Richard Satchwell had been charged with the murder of his wife". A number of gardaí who were called to give evidence in the voir dire denied that they had contacted anyone in the media but accepted that Mr Byrne had tweeted about it several minutes in advance and that Mr O'Toole had named Satchwell as being charged two minutes after it occurred. Mr Grehan said it was "implicit" that contact was made with a number of people in the media "to enable them to do their job". Counsel also submitted that Satchwell should have been informed that he could consult with his solicitor before the charging process took place and was entitled to legal advice "at this critical juncture". "It vitiated the process and the court should not permit the fruits of the charging to be now available to the prosecution," he added. Richard Satchwell's Senior council Brendan Grehan (left) and solicitor Eddie Burke. During the trial and in the absence of the jury, Mr Grehan applied to exclude Satchwell's 'cryptic' reply of 'Guilty or not guilty, guilty' when he was formally charged with the murder of Tina on October 13, 2023. Photo: Niall Carson/PA He said the defendant's solicitor Eddie Burke had left the garda station at 7.07pm that evening and didn't arrive back until 8.10pm - three minutes after the charging took place. The lawyer said his client's reply after caution was more prejudicial than probative and would create difficulties in terms of how the jury could be properly directed. In reply, Ms Small said Satchwell, who was interviewed by gardaí on 10 separate occasions, had a "full appreciation of his entitlement not to say anything" in reply to the caution and was acutely aware of this. The defence, she said, was claiming there is an entitlement to have a solicitor present on charging and she wasn't aware of any such entitlement. She said the entitlement was to legal advice, which Satchwell had received "in abundance". She called the media tweets "completely irrelevant". In his ruling, Mr Justice McDermott said the defendant's reply was fully voluntary and found that the absence of a solicitor in the garda station had not impaired the fairness of the process. He refused to exclude the reply to charge. DIRECTION TO REMOVE MURDER CHARGE FROM INDICTMENT When the prosecution's case was at an end, Mr Grehan applied to the judge to withdraw the charge of murder against his client, submitting there was no evidence of an intention to kill or cause serious injury, which he said was "a huge lacuna" in the State's case. "It is one of the elements of the offence of murder which the prosecution have to adduce evidence of, which they have singularly failed to do," he argued. He said Assistant State Pathologist Dr Margaret Bolster couldn't give a cause of death due to a very long post mortem period and had confirmed there were no broken bones in Tina's body. He said she wasn't able to conclude anything about the state of the organs due to the lapse of time. Mr Grehan said there was an explanation available to the jury as to how death was caused in the case without the evidence of the pathologist or anthropologist and that explanation was given by his client, where Satchwell said the belt of Tina's bathrobe had been held up against her neck until she collapsed. Counsel said this was the only account available as to what happened to Tina and was of "immense importance" as there was no evidence of violence discovered in the post mortem. Counsel said it was significant that Tina's hyoid bone was unfractured. He said there was also no medical evidence to say that his client's account of holding Tina off with a restraint against her neck before she collapsed suddenly was not possible. In a ruling, Mr Justice McDermott said Richard Satchwell's (pictured) immediate response was to create a false impression that Tina was alive and he had taken every conceivable step to protect himself. File photo: Brian Lawless/PA In reply, Ms Small submitted that there was "a wealth of evidence" from the surrounding circumstances in the case from which intent could be inferred. Counsel said the deception began on March 20, 2017, very shortly after Satchwell killed Tina and the plethora of lies were an acknowledgement of guilt. Ms Small said a limited post mortem examination was conducted because the defendant had buried his wife in a manner to ensure the cause of death wasn't available. She added: "There is also motive on his own account, Satchwell says she is threatening to leave him. She has wasted 28 years of her life, that is all part of the evidence for the jury to accept or not." Mr Grehan said the lies told were not sufficient to show intent for murder. Referring to motive, he said there was also clearly a basis for which Tina might have wanted nothing further to do with her husband and attacked him in that manner. In his ruling, Mr Justice McDermott said Satchwell's immediate response was to create a false impression that Tina was alive and he had taken every conceivable step to protect himself. He said Satchwell told lie after lie "to any journalist who'd indulge him" and portrayed a scenario that his wife had deserted him suddenly without any explanation. Mr Justice McDermott said Satchwell had shown a degree of malevolence towards his wife and the defendant was totally focused on protecting himself from discovery. There had been, he said, a period of six prolonged years before Tina's body, of which Satchwell had disposed of, was found and this was relevant to the issue of intention. He said it was a matter for the jury as to whether Satchwell had formed the requisite intent and whether he was guilty of his wife's murder. He rejected the application to withdraw the murder charge. APPLICATION TO DISCHARGE THE JURY At the very end of the trial, when Mr Justice McDermott had finished charging the jurors, Mr Grehan said on foot of instructions from his client he "regrettably" had to seek the discharge of the jury. Counsel voiced his opposition to the tone of the charge, which he said was intended to "nudge" the jurors towards a guilty verdict. Counsel said he became increasingly concerned as the charge proceeded that it was not resembling a charge but a "second prosecution speech" in terms of the emphasis the court was placing on the State's case to the detriment of the defence. Mr Grehan told the judge he had not put the defence case in full at all to the jury. He said the two separate tasks of directions on the law and a summary of the evidence had become "intermingled" and submitted there was no balance in what had been said to the panel. "The whole emphasis of what was said to the court seemed to be to reiterate the prosecution case," he argued. Richard Satchwell's Senior council Brendan Grehan (left) and solicitor Eddie Burke. Mr Grehan had sought the discharge of the jury on foot of instructions from his client. Photo: Niall Carson/PA Mr Grehan said the facts of the case "shouted and screamed for themselves" in terms of what Satchwell did and didn't do. "They are not facts that need to be nudged or pushed for the jury in any particular way". Counsel said it was beyond remedy at this stage and the court should discharge the jury. Ms Small called Mr Grehan's application "wholly inappropriate", describing the charge as balanced, fair and extremely comprehensible. "The criticism is unfounded, a court will rarely outline all the evidence, that is a matter for the jury". In his ruling, the judge said this was a difficult case in which to sum up the evidence for the jury and he didn't accept that his charge was "so wildly unbalanced". He disagreed that the absence of references to certain parts of the evidence in any sense justified the jury being discharged. Mr Justice McDermott refused the application but did give the jury further directions in relation to two matters of which complaints were made, one relating to the detailed evidence of Lorraine Howard concerning her half sister Tina, the other to evidence that Satchwell loved or was "besotted" with his wife. Read More How a concrete patch under the stairs in Youghal revealed Tina Satchwell's tragic fate
