#Open journalism No news is bad news

Your contributions will help us continue to deliver the stories that are important to you

Support The Journal
Dublin: 11°C Saturday 19 June 2021
Advertisement

One of Kevin Lunney accused made 'planted' DNA complaint to Garda Ombudsman, court hears

Lunney (50) was abducted close to his home in Co Fermanagh on the evening of 17 September 2019.

ONE OF THE four men accused of falsely imprisoning and assaulting Quinn Industrial Holdings (QIH) director Kevin Lunney has complained to the Garda Ombudsman that DNA was “planted” on a van that he says was deliberately destroyed in a fire so it wouldn’t be made available to the defence, the Special Criminal Court was told today.

However, lawyers for the State told the three-judge court that the fire began accidentally.

The non-jury court will rule next month on whether the 12-week trial can go ahead in January as scheduled after lawyers for the four accused today applied to adjourn the case.

Luke O’Reilly (66), with an address at Mullahoran Lower, Kilcogy, Co Cavan; Darren Redmond (25), from Caledon Road, East Wall, Dublin 3; Alan O’Brien (39), of Shelmalier Road, East Wall, Dublin 3 and the fourth accused man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, are all charged with false imprisonment and assault causing serious harm to Lunney at Drumbrade, Ballinagh, Co Cavan on September 17, 2019.

The businessman’s leg was broken, he was doused in bleach and the letters QIH were carved into his chest during the two-and-a-half hour ordeal before he was dumped on a roadside in Co Cavan.

The four defendants were sent forward for trial before the Special Criminal Court last March and the non-jury court has fixed January 11 2021 as their trial date. It is expected to last 12 weeks.

Defence counsel Michael O’Higgins SC, for the unnamed man, told the three-judge court today that he was applying to adjourn the trial in January on four grounds.

The barrister said the first ground concerned “the volume of disclosure” and in his submission there was no reasonable prospect that the material would be scrutinised in the available time.

“My client said he wants to see the material himself and go through it and that is not an unreasonable request,” he added.

Secondly, O’Higgins said High Court challenges are also being brought by the defendants against the Special Criminal Court’s jurisdiction to try the matter.

The High Court has set a hearing for February 23 and the correct thing to do was to adjourn the trial pending the outcome of the judicial review matter, he said, adding that there was “no stay” in place.

Furthermore, O’Higgins said there was also important DNA evidence found on an abandoned Renault Kangoo van, which went on fire from an electrical fault.

He submitted that GSOC was carrying out an investigation into the fire and it did not seem unreasonable to wait for the outcome.

The three-judge court has heard that a van used in the alleged abduction of Lunney was seized by gardaí during the investigation.

However, the Special Criminal Court was previously told that the vehicle may have been “accidentally burned” while in the possession of gardaí.

In addition, O’Higgins argued that the law on the retention and accessing of mobile phone data was in a “state of flux” in Ireland and one needed to have certainty on these issues before the trial commenced.

He submitted that three decisions are awaited from the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and it was “inconceivable” that the trial should proceed in circumstances where the law was unknown.

The barrister said it would be necessary for the Supreme Court to write a judgement once the reference had been answered by the ECJ and outline where it “fitted” into Irish law, something which the superior court is not currently in a position to do.

Michael Bowman SC, for Redmond, said he adopted O’Higgins’ position concerning the mobile phone data and he also wanted to understand what had happened to the Kangoo van in the fire.

“The van is gone, the cause of the fire may be something that requires further investigation,” he added.

In reply, Sean Guerin SC on behalf of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), said he was opposing the application for an adjournment of the trial.

Guerin called the application regarding the issue of the retention of mobile phones an “illusory” one and said the Special Criminal Court should proceed to exercise its jurisdiction to hear the criminal allegation.

#Open journalism No news is bad news Support The Journal

Your contributions will help us continue to deliver the stories that are important to you

Support us now

The lawyer said the case involved very serious violence to a person and the State had an obligation to ensure the prosecution and vindicate the personal rights of the victim.

“That requires a trial as early as possible,” he added.

Guerin said the Renault Kangoo van, which had come into the possession of gardaí, had Lunney’s DNA on it and allegedly that of one of the accused men.

Guerin said the fourth accused, who cannot be named for legal reasons, had made a complaint to GSOC that DNA evidence was “planted” on the vehicle, before it was destroyed in order that it would not be made available to the defence.

There was CCTV footage available, which had been disclosed to the defence, and it showed a “bank of sockets” overloaded with phone chargers inside the van, said Guerin.

He explained that one could see the electricals beginning to spark, a fire taking hold and destroying the premises on the footage.

The lawyer said the vehicle was not available as it was destroyed by a fire, which had begun accidentally.

Mr Justice Tony Hunt presiding, sitting with Judge Sarah Berkeley and Judge Michael Walsh, said there was a “fair bit to think about and weigh up”. The three-judge court will rule on the proposed adjournment of the trial on December 7.

Comments are closed for legal purposes.

About the author:

Alison O'Riordan

Read next:

COMMENTS