a day ago
Man has conviction overturned despite State claiming Snapchat video evidence used to clear him was edited
Myles Smith (22) had his conviction quashed at the District Court Appeals Court, despite the State submitting that other video footage presented as evidence in the case had been edited.
Mr Smith, with an address at Mount Symon Lawn, Clonsilla, Dublin 15, had pleaded not guilty in the District Court to dangerous driving contrary to section 53.1 of the Road Traffic Act, 1961, and had also denied counts of driving with no insurance, driving without a licence, two counts of failure to produce documents and failure to produce information contrary to section 107 4b of the same act.
Garda Andrew Burlingham told the appeals court that he was on patrol in the Blanchardstown area on April 12, 2021, at around 9pm when he observed a car drive from the left lane to the right lane without indicating and crossing over another vehicle.
He said that he saw the car fail to indicate and turn back into Blanchardstown Shopping Centre, where his garda colleague activated his lights and sirens to indicate for the car to stop.
Garda Burlingham said that the vehicle failed to stop and that he observed it driving at high speed, forcing other road users to take evasive action.
He said that in the following pursuit, he saw the car driving extremely fast over speed bumps, ignore a red light and drive the wrong way around a roundabout.
He said he pursued the car as it approached Aldemere Drive in Clonsilla, where he said it mounted a green area in an estate and was abandoned by the occupants.
Garda Burlingham said that he saw Mr Smith exit from the driver's side of the car, that he pursued him to where he was hiding in a wooded area and arrested him.
On the count of dangerous driving, Mr Smith was disqualified from driving for two years and given a fine of €450 in the District Court. He also got a two-year driving ban and a €400 fine for his charge of driving with no insurance and a fine of €300 euro for his charge of driving without a licence.
Defence counsel for Mr Smith, Aoife McNickle BL, submitted that her client was not driving the car during the incident.
Counsel said that he was sitting in the passenger side of the vehicle at the time, and presented a Snapchat video taken by Mr Smith during the pursuit, which she said proved he was in the passenger seat.
The footage, which was played to the court, showed Mr Smith sitting in the car while flashing lights from the gardaí could be seen through the rear window and wing mirrors.
She also presented a second video, taken by Mr Smith after the event, in order to prove his position in the car was in fact the passenger seat, not the driver seat.
Counsel for the Director of Public Prosecutions, Clare Barry, put it to Mr Smith that she believed the second video had been edited between the moments when the camera flipped between front facing and back facing angles. She said that 'even the most digitally illiterate people can do that'.
Mr Smith denied that the footage was edited and maintained that he was in the passenger seat and not driving the car.
Mr Smith also claimed that Garda Burlingham was not the garda member who arrested him at the scene.
Ms Barry said it was the State's case that Mr Smith was driving the car during the chase and that the second video, which he said proved he was in the passenger seat, was not authentic. Mr Smith denied this claim in court.
Judge Jonathan Dunphy said that after 'numerous viewings' of the video evidence, he had doubt over who was driving the car.
He said that although Mr Smith's behaviour as a passenger of the car was 'a disgrace', he must give him the benefit of the doubt and found there is no satisfactory evidence that he was the owner or driver of the car.
He decided to allow the appeal of Mr Smith's conviction on these grounds.
Funded by the Courts Reporting Scheme.
