A MAN HAS been convicted of conspiring to pervert the course of justice during Aaron Brady’s trial for the murder of Detective Garda Adrian Donohoe.

The three-judge, non-jury Special Criminal Court delivered its verdict today following the trial of Dean Byrne, who conspired with Brady to dissuade key witness Daniel Cahill from giving evidence.

The court found that Byrne tried to get family members of Cahill to contact him and persuade him not to tell the trial that Brady had confessed to him on at least three occasions that he murdered a garda.

As part of the conspiracy, Brady sent copies of parts of Cahill’s statement to Byrne who then passed them on to a man who had previously lived with Cahill’s father.

Byrne repeatedly asked this man to “talk to him [Daniel Cahill] and ask him not to do it”.
In another message Byrne referred to Cahill as a “filthbag, rat bastard of a thing”.

Mr Justice Paul Burns, presiding, adjourned the sentencing hearing to 15 July. Brady, who previously pleaded guilty to sending a video of another witness giving a statement to gardaí, will have a hearing on the same date.

Byrne is already serving an 18–year sentence with four suspended for a burglary in 2013 in which he and six others broke into a family home and terrorised the parents and their three daughters, aged eight, six and two.

Byrne (30) from Cabra Park, Phibsborough, Dublin was today convicted of conspiring with Aaron Brady in Mountjoy Prison between 8 April 2020 and 22 June 2020 to persuade prosecution witness Daniel Cahill not to give evidence at Brady’s murder trial, a course of conduct which had a tendency to and which was intended to pervert the course of justice.

Convicted of murder

In August 2020, Brady (33) formerly of New Road, Crossmaglen, Co Armagh was convicted by a jury of the murder of Detective Garda Adrian Donohoe during a credit union robbery at Lordship, Bellurgan, Co Louth on 25 January, 2013.

Earlier this year Brady pleaded guilty to a charge that on a date between 20 February and 7 May 2020, within the State, he video recorded the playing of an interview between Ronan Flynn, a witness at his trial, and An Garda Síochána, thus embarking on a course of conduct intended to pervert the course of justice.

Mr Justice Burns said the court was satisfied that Brady and Byrne were in regular communication during Brady’s trial in 2020. Both were being housed on different landings in the D-wing of Mountjoy prison.

They had opportunities to speak during recreation breaks in the yard and gym and also through Brady’s volunteer work delivering leaflets to cells for the Red Cross. The court was further satisfied that both men had the use of mobile phones while in their cells which they used to communicate with one another.

Mr Justice Burns said the evidence showed that they agreed on a course of conduct to prevail on others to dissuade Cahill from giving evidence. He said it was clear that Brady was feeding information about Cahill’s evidence to Byrne.

Important witness

Cahill was an important witness in the ongoing trial, the judge said, and the agreed course of conduct was intended to interfere with or obstruct the course of justice.

While the court found that there might be circumstances in which a person could legitimately try to dissuade a witness, this is not such a case. A family member, friend or legal or health advisor might have legitimate concerns for a person giving evidence in court, the judge said.

In this case Byrne is not a family member or friend Mr Cahill and was not acting in an advisory role. The judge said the defence argument that Byrne genuinely believed that Cahill was going to give false testimony was not relevant.

Byrne, he said, had no legitimate involvement in the trial. Rather, he had recruited others to put social pressure on Cahill and unlawfully disseminated copies of parts of the witnesses’ statement.

Brady, the judge said, had been given access to those statements for conducting his defence, not for disseminating to third parties with no legal interest in the case or to bring pressure on intended witnesses.

In his closing speech to the court earlier this year, Lorcan Staines SC for the Director of Public Prosecutions described the conspiracy as a “criminal act of the most insidious kind.”

He said there was a “campaign of witness intimidation… to stop, using the accused’s own word, ‘rats’ from giving evidence.”

Staines said that while Aaron Brady was the conductor of the campaign, Dean Byrne was “one of his enthusiastic cheerleaders”.

Padraig Dwyer SC, for the defence, argued that there was “scant” evidence of association between Brady and Byrne and they had only limited opportunities to communicate due to a covid lockdown in 2020.

He further argued that his client had a genuine belief that Cahill was going to give false evidence.