THE JURY IN the trial of law professor Diarmuid Phelan, who denies murdering a trespasser on his farm, will now “break for a long period” and not commence their deliberations until after Christmas.
The postponement has come because of the unavailability of a juror after the case ran over its allotted time.
The trial judge also told the jurors today that there was no issue if any of their member wished to return to work in the interim.
The panel of nine men and three women had previously flagged to the trial judge that they were not available to attend the Central Criminal Court this afternoon, tomorrow or all of next week.
It was initially thought the jurors might have been available to commence their deliberations on 22 or 23 December, but it transpired this was not possible.
Presiding judge Ms Justice Siobhan Lankford told the jury earlier in the week that they would be accommodated as they were now in week nine of a trial they were initially told would last six weeks.
Having spent four days delivering her charge, the judge has now completed going through the evidence for the 12 jurors in the Central Criminal Court trial of Phelan (56), who has pleaded not guilty to murdering father-of-four Keith ‘Bono’ Conlon (36) at Hazelgrove Farm, Kiltalown Lane, Tallaght, Dublin 24 on 24 February, 2022.
The accused man is a barrister, law lecturer and farmer who owns Hazelgrove, formerly a golf course in Tallaght.
When the jury came into court this morning, a note was handed up to the judge by the forewoman, which was then handed down to counsel but not read aloud in the courtroom.
The judge continued to read back on parts of the evidence in the case, which she said both the prosecution and defence had asked her to bring to the jury’s attention.
“While it’s not obligatory, it won’t take too long,” she added.
When she had finished dealing with the requisitions, the judge said those parts of the evidence were “a reminder of other things” that counsel might consider important.
“At the end of the day it’s entirely for you to consider what is important,” she said.
When the judge addressed the jury’s note in front of the panel, she said: “If you are available to sit on December 30, 31 and January 2 and 3 that’s fine. You have difficulty on December 22 and 23″.
Addressing a question from the jurors contained in the note as to what they would do about work when the trial was not sitting, the judge said: “This trial has been extremely intense and the level of concentration required is extremely high. If any of you wish to return to work there is no difficulty, there is no issue with that”.
The judge told the jurors that a letter of exemption from work would be available from the registrar if they wished not to attend their workplace.
She stressed to the jurors that it was important for them to “keep their heads as clear as possible and focus on these matters rather than being distracted by other things”.
However, the judge said it was a matter for themselves and she would not prohibit them from attending work.
Given the jury was “going away for a lengthy period”, the judge said the registrar would go into the jury room to get their phone numbers before they left the building.
She said they wanted “to make sure we have your numbers perfectly correct and if any of you get a new phone or mobile number over Christmas please get in touch. Let’s make sure we can stay in contact”.
The judge said because they “were breaking for a long period” she would leave two matters over until they returned to the Central Criminal Court on 30 December.
The judge said it is common for a judge to summarise the prosecution and defence cases and that she would do this on 30 December.
Secondly, the judge said she hoped to be able to give the jurors a document setting out “the legal questions” they must ask themselves, which would “give them a path to follow to come to the verdict”.
The judge then wished the 12 jurors a very happy Christmas. “Thank you very much for your attendance thus far. Stay safe over Christmas and see you on the 30th,” she added.
In her charge on the law on Monday, the judge told the jury they must consider whether the State has proven it is not reasonably possible that Phelan unintentionally hit a trespasser on his farm with a third shot from his revolver.
The judge also told the jury that if they found that Phelan did intend to kill or seriously injure the trespasser, they must consider the issue of self-defence raised by the defendant.
She told the panel that there were three verdicts they could return in relation to the murder charge against Phelan, namely; guilty of murder, not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter or not guilty.
The jury has heard that on the day in question three men – the deceased Keith Conlon, along with Kallum Coleman and Robin Duggan – had trespassed on a wooded area of Phelan’s land while hunting foxes or badgers.
Phelan told gardaí in his interviews that he became concerned about a dog running loose on his land towards his sheep.
When he got a view of the dog, he shot it with his Winchester rifle, whereupon he said three men immediately “exploded” from the woods and began threatening him.
Phelan said he was shaking with fear and had “scrambled” up a bank to get away but when the two men kept coming he believed they were “coming to fulfil the threats they had made”.
As they got closer, Phelan shouted at two of the unarmed trespassers on his farm to “get back” before he fired three shots from his Smith & Wesson revolver and said he was “stunned when one man went down”.
It is the State’s case that two of the three shots were fired into the air, while the third connected with the deceased.
It is also the prosecution’s case that when the third shot was fired by Phelan, the gun was pointed in the direction of the deceased, who was shot in the back of the head when he had turned away to leave.
It is in those circumstances, the prosecution say, that the accused intended to kill or cause serious injury to the deceased.
It is the defence’s position that Phelan accidentally hit the deceased while firing three “warning shots”.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
have your say