Counsel for a young man jailed for the manslaughter of student Brian Murphy outside Anabel nightclub in Dublin in 2000 has told the Court of Criminal Appeal that he was "baffled" as to how that verdict was reached.
Mr Michael O'Higgins SC was making closing submissions on the fourth and final day of the appeal by Dermot Laide (23), Rossvale, Castleblayney, Co Monaghan, who is serving a four-year sentence for the killing of Brian Murphy outside the nightclub at the Burlington Hotel on August 31st, 2000.
Laide received a concurrent two-year sentence when found guilty of violent disorder.
The three-judge appeal court yesterday reserved judgment on Laide's appeal. It also reserved judgment on the appeal against conviction and sentence by Desmond Ryan (23), of Cunningham Road, Dalkey, Dublin, who was sentenced to nine months for violent disorder at the time.
Late last year, the appeal court rejected an appeal by Seán Mackey (24), of South Park, Foxrock, Dublin, who was jailed for two years when convicted of violent disorder.
Yesterday, Mr O'Higgins argued that, should the appeal court quash his client's conviction, there should be no retrial. As the events involved in the case had taken place in the year 2000, the practicalities of having a retrial would be immense and his client had been in jail for a year, he said.
Referring to one newspaper headline during last year's seven-week trial which had claimed that taxpayers would pay for the "posh kids'" trial, counsel submitted that Laide's father, a publican, was not a member of a "silver spoon club" and was a person who had wanted his son to get a good education. He worked "pulling pints" and was not a member of the south Dublin "elite", counsel added.
The kicking of Mr Murphy happened when he was on the ground and at a time when he was very vulnerable and his defences were at their weakest, counsel said. To attribute kicking to Laide in those circumstances was most unfair.
Mr O'Higgins said his client had not initially wanted a separate trial and had wanted the joint trial provided it was done in a way when it could be fair. If ultimately it transpired that there could not be a joint trial which was fair to everybody, he must have been given a separate trial. Laide and Mackey were the only people seeking separate trials.
Earlier, counsel for the DPP submitted that separate trials for those charged could have rendered an injustice to each of the individual accused.
Mr Brendan Grehan SC said the prosecution would have opposed in every possible manner any application for separate trials.
If there had been four different trials, questions would have arisen over who went first for trial, he suggested. There would also have been complaints about the media response after the first trial and questions about who went second, third and fourth for trial.
With separate trials, there would be an injustice not only to the people of Ireland, represented by the DPP, but also to the individual accused and the family of the deceased who would have had to endure a number of trials, counsel added.
Leaving aside those considerations, there was a risk of inconsistent verdicts where one accused might feel aggrieved because he was selected first or last and would not get a fair trial.
In further submissions, Mr Grehan said Laide had sought the editing of his co-accused's statements and he could not have resiled from that position.
Mr Edward Comyn SC, also for the DPP, said there had been some generally unwelcome publicity in relation to the trial and that had been acknowledged by the trial judge.
The prosecution was satisfied that the warnings the trial judge had given would meet any prejudice that arose from that publicity.