Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
A “SMOULDERING RESENTMENT” exploded into violence in which a murder accused struck a 66-year-old six or seven times on the head with a rock before putting him over Ireland’s tallest cliffs, a barrister has told a jury at the Central Criminal Court.
Eoin Lawlor SC, delivered his closing speech on behalf of his client Nikita Burns (23) who told gardai that her co-accused Alan Vial (39) had delivered the blows that caused the death of Robert ‘Robin’ Wilkin.
Lawlor said Burns had “no act nor part” in the killing and was a “bystander to Vial’s murder of Mr Wilkin” and did not help to put him over the cliffs at Sliabh Liag.
Counsel said his client accepts that she assisted Vial by cleaning blood from the car in which the assault happened and for that, she has pleaded guilty to impeding the apprehension or prosecution of another person for an arrestable offence.
However, Shane Costelloe SC, for Vial, said the evidence shows that it was Burns who inflicted the blows that killed Robert Wilkin. His client, counsel said, is an “idiot” for helping to dispose of the body in a “pathetic” attempt to cover up what Burns had done, but he is not a murderer.
Costelloe said Vial lied to gardai to cover for Burns because he had feelings for her. But rather than being a master criminal and deceiver, he was inept and his lies were easily disproved.
He lied, Costelloe said, not because he wanted to hide that he was a murderer but because he knew he had done something “truly horrendous” by desecrating Wilkin’s body and by trying to destroy evidence of Burns’ crime.
Mr Justice Paul McDermott will begin his charge to the jury of seven women and five men tomorrow.
Vial (39) of Drumanoo Head, Killybegs, Co Donegal and Burns (23) of Carrick, Co Donegal have both pleaded not guilty to the murder of Robert ‘Robin’ Wilkin in Donegal on June 25, 2023.
Wilkin’s body was found in the sea near Sliabh Liag eight days after his alleged murder.
State Pathologist Dr Margaret Bolster told the trial that she was unable to identify a cause of death due to the body’s state of decomposition and the damage caused by the fall down the cliff.
However, she did identify two depressed fractures to the back of the skull which were not consistent with the fall down the cliff and which would likely have led to death within 15 to 20 minutes.
Bernard Condon SC, for the Director of Public Prosecutions, previously told the jury that both Vial and Burns were acting together with the joint intention of causing serious harm to Wilkin.
Condon said all three were drinking together in pubs in Dunkineely before they headed towards Vial’s home in a Volkswagen Passat driven by Wilkin.
In an area known as Roshine, the car pulled in for about 15 minutes where the prosecution alleges Wilkin was beaten with a rock before being driven to Sliabh Liag and put over the cliff.
Vial testified that he was in the back seat of the Passat with Wilkin driving and Burns in the passenger seat after a day of heavy drinking.
The accused said that a row broke out and Wilkin pulled in at Roshine, turned around in his seat and punched Vial multiple times in the head. Vial said he had grabbed Wilkin’s wrists to prevent him from delivering any further punches when Burns appeared at the passenger front door and twice struck the deceased on the back of the head with a rock, causing him to stop breathing.
Lawlor described Vial as a “sophisticated liar” whose testimony can be disregarded. He described Vial as a “murderer telling lies” who sought advantage by using his knowledge of the evidence in the case.
He had, counsel suggested, come up with the account of Burns delivering the two blows only after hearing Dr Bolster’s evidence.
The prosecution relied on comments Burns made to three people the day after the killing when she said she had “battered” a man’s face with a rock and that she “liked it”.
Lawlor said the evidence shows that when she made that alleged admission she was highly intoxicated and was not thinking straight. He suggested that the admissions are not reliable and are consistent with an “irrational” attempt to help Vial by implicating herself.
He reminded the jury that Burns said she claimed to have struck Wilkin because she didn’t want Vial to take all the blame.
Lawlor asked the jury to consider Burns’ difficult upbringing, lack of education, the trauma of having witnessed Wilkin’s murder and her level of intoxication when assessing the alleged admissions.
Lawlor invited the jury to view CCTV of Wilkin’s and Vial’s interactions on the night in various pubs and to consider evidence of prior aggression between them. He suggested that Vial had a “smouldering resentment” towards Wilkin that “ultimately exploded”.
He added: “In light of what you know of Mr Vial, it is easy to accept that he would and did take a rock and strike Mr Wilkin in the head six or seven times after pulling him into the back of the car and that he, ultimately, murdered Mr Wilkin.”
Lawlor said there was no criminal agreement between his client and Vial and she was not part of any plan to assault Wilkin.
She was merely present when a physical fight between her boyfriend and Robert Wilkin spiralled out of control “because Mr Vial got a rock and beat Mr Wilkin to death”.
Costelloe, however, said the pathology evidence identified only the two injuries to the back of Wilkin’s head, which could not have been inflicted by Vial if he was fighting the deceased in the car.
He asked the jury to consider how, if the two men were fighting, Mr Vial would have had time to get out of the car, find the rock and return to use it to beat Wilkin over the head.
“That cannot be what happened,” he said, “and if it can’t, that fatally wounds the prosecution case.”
He said his client is a “sad man, a petty criminal and an alcoholic” who was “over the moon” when 21-year-old Nikita Burns started living with him and sharing his bed.
“And then he finds himself in this situation. He is not a murderer but he is an idiot for doing what he did afterwards.”
have your say