The Supreme Court has fixed a new hearing date in December for the appeal by Tipperary farmer Patrick Quirke against his conviction for the murder of Bobby Ryan.
The appeal had been listed for hearing today but was deferred after a lawyer involved tested positive some days ago for Covid-19.
The Supreme Court last year resumed the physical hearing of appeals after the lifting of public health restrictions resulting from the Covid-19 pandemic.
During a case management hearing today, the Chief Justice, Mr Justice Donal O’Donnell said he wanted to fix a date as soon as possible to facilitate all the sides and he offered some dates in November and December.
The court considered the appeal was not suitable for a remote hearing because there are a considerable number of issues which that court wanted to explore with counsel, he said. The court also believed it should allow for the possibility of the hearing running for two days.
The Chief Justice said the court was anxious the appeal should be heard soon.
After the sides indicated the most appropriate dates were December 12th and 13th, he fixed those dates for the hearing.
Michael Bowman SC, for the DPP, also secured permission to put in submissions replying to submissions made by the Irish Human Rights and Equality Commission (IRHEC).
Quirke, who has denied any involvement in Mr Ryan’s murder, sought a Supreme Court appeal after the Court of Appeal last year dismissed all 52 grounds of his appeal against his 2019 conviction.
The prosecution argued during his 15 week trial that Mr Ryan, a DJ known as Mr Moonlight, was Quirke’s love rival and was murdered by Quirke so he could rekindle an affair with farm owner Mary Lowry.
Mr Ryan’s remains were found in a disused underground tank on Ms Lowry’s farm almost two years after he went missing. He had been in a relationship with Ms Lowry and was last seen alive as he left her home to go to work on June 3rd 2011.
The prosecution said Quirke staged the discovery of the body as he was about to give up his lease on the farm and feared he would be found out.
In its decision last April agreeing to hear the appeal, the Supreme Court said it raised two matters of general public importance which may arise in other criminal trials and would benefit from clarification.
The issues relate to the validity of a warrant used to search and seize material from Mr Quirke’s home and the DPP’s discretion to call witnesses at trial.
Among the items seized under the warrant was a computer which formed a key part of the evidence against Quirke after it was found to have been used for internet searches on human decomposition and DNA.
Mr Quirke’s lawyers argue the warrant was invalid due to specific failure to inform and expressly include the intention to seize computers containing the personal data of an entire family.
The IRHEC is participating in the appeal as an amicus curiae, an assistant to the court on legal issues. The focus of the Commission’s participation concerns legal issues surrounding the reach of the search warrants.
