State witness Charles Bowden is a "supergrass" and "vicious criminal" who told deliberate lies aimed at involving Paul Ward in the murder of journalist Veronica Guerin and to minimise Bowden’s own involvement in the crime, the Court of Criminal Appeal was told today.
Bowden's role in the murder, suggested Mr Barry White SC, for Ward, was to dispose of the murder weapon which gun Bowden had admitted to having cleaned and loaded prior to Ms Guerin being shot. Bowden had given evidence to an earlier trial, of Patrick 'Dutchy' Holland, that he loaded 'dum-dum' bullets into the gun but told Ward's trial that they were concave bullets.
Bowden had admitted he was on Moore Street in Dublin the afternoon of the murder with Brian Meehan (who is serving a life sentence for Ms Guerin’s murder) and another man. The question was, what was Bowden doing there, Mr White asked. He suggested Bowden was there "to get rid of the gun" and added his hypothesis was supported by the fact that Bowden had never given a credible explanation for his movements on the day of the murder.
Crucial to the finding by the non-jury Special Criminal Court that Ward was guilty of murder was its acceptance of Bowden’s claim that Ward’s role in the murder was to dispose of the gun and motorcyle used, Mr Paul McDermott SC, also for Ward, said. Although the motorcyle was never found and Bowden had given no evidence at all in relation to it, the SCC still found that Ward had disposed of it. This was a crucial error of fact.
Mr White said the SCC failed to give any or any proper weight to the lies and inconsistencies in Bowden’s evidence, even when Bowden was caught out in deliberate lies. The court had erred in fact and in law in failing to treat Bowden as a "supergrass".
Bowden’s testimony was so unreliable that no court would or should have convicted on it, counsel said. "He not only told lies when it suited him but did so to serve particular purposes and also, it appears, he lied from time to time for no apparent reason."
Bowden could not even tell the truth on relatively trivial matters, including how he got involved in the "Gilligan gang". Bowden was deliberately vague about dates and times to avoid being "pinned down".
In particular, the SCC failed to attach proper weight to Bowden’s telling gardai in statements and later the court that Paul Ward was present at a "gang celebration" at the Hole in the Wall pub in Dublin on June 26th 1996, the afternoon of Ms Guerin’s murder, Mr White said.
This claim was aimed at involving Ward in a joint enterprise. However, Bowden’s fiancee had given a table plan to gardai which showed Ward was not present and Bowden later admitted Ward was not there. But, when Bowden was giving evidence to the SCC at Ward’s trial, he had repeated that Ward was there until he was confronted by counsel for Ward.
Then he agreed Ward was not present but said he had said Ward was there because Bowden had said so in a statement to gardai. If Bowden's fiancee's statement had not been available to the defence, Bowden would have persisted in this significant untruth, Mr White said.
This demonstrated the danger of relying on Bowden’s uncorroborated evidence and was indicative of Bowden’s intention to keep a bond to deliver up Paul Ward.
Mr White also argued the SCC failed to address the inherent danger of accepting Bowden’s evidence in circumstances where, at the time of Ward’s trial, Bowden had not finalised a "package" with the State in relation to his testifying against Ward. He argued Bowden stood to benefit if convictions were secured.
He added that Bowden had also untruthfully said he was going home "to bed" on the night of the murder. He later said he went to the POD nightclub. A journalist who lived next door to Bowden had reported a "raucous" party had been held in Bowden’s house that same night. All this showed the necessity of having corroboration for anything said by Bowden.
Yesterday was the second day of the appeal by Ward (37), with an address at Walkinstown, Dublin, against his conviction by the SCC of the murder of Ms Guerin (36) at Naas Road, Clondalkin. The Sunday Independentjournalist was shot by a gunman on a motorcycle while she sat in her car at traffic lights.
Ward, who is serving a life sentence, has filed more than 30 grounds of appeal. He is not proceeding with one ground relating to the withholding of certain material from the defence because that non-disclosure has already been unsuccessfully challenged in the High Court.
In submissions, Mr White said Bowden’s evidence insofar as it implicated Ward in the murder was not eye witness testimony of events but rather consisted of allegations of conversations prior to and after the murder.
It was contended Ward was present at certain conversations but did not contribute to these.
Mr White said Bowden was a serious criminal who, having been granted immunity for his former crimes, turned State evidence against alleged former associates. He was a "supergrass" whose evidence must be approached with even greater reservations and suspicion than accomplice evidence. The SCC gave no reasons for its decision that Bowden was not a supergrass.
That decision was inappropriate, incorrect and wrong in law and in fact. If the CCA found the SCC was correct not to consider Bowden in the supergrass category, the CCA should look to the character of Bowden and consider, where the SCC had found Bowden to be an "inveterate liar", the nature and degree of the warning the trial court should have given itself about his evidence Where an accomplice chose to give evidence against an entire network of persons, an even sterner test on credibility must be applied.
The appeal continues today.
