The Court of Appeal has dismissed Gary Howard’s appeal against his convictions for the murders of Paddy Mooney and Brendan Molyneaux, rejecting challenges to his arrest, interview evidence, detention and the trial judge’s directions to the jury.
The judgment was delivered by Mr Justice Edwards on 20 July 2016. Howard had been convicted of two counts of murder in the Central Criminal Court on 25 May 2012 after a 26-day trial. The victims were shot dead on 10 January 2010 at 4G Pearse House, Dublin 2.
Howard argued that his arrest was unlawful because gardaí used a search warrant to enter his Finglas home. The appeal court held that the warrant was separate from the arrest and that the gardaí could arrest him on entering the premises under powers in the Criminal Law Act 1997. It found the arrest lawful.
He also challenged the admission of statements he made in custody, including an admission made after he had asked to speak to his solicitor during an interview on 13 January 2010. The gardaí did not pass that request to the member in charge, and his solicitor was not contacted before the next interview, in which the admission was made. The appeal court said the request should have been followed up. However, given Howard’s repeated earlier contact with his solicitor and the advice he had received, it found that the failure on this occasion did not breach his constitutional rights so as to make the statement inadmissible.
The court also rejected his claim that persistent and robust questioning had made his admissions involuntary. It relied on the trial judge’s review of the recorded interviews and found the questioning was not oppressive or unfair.
A further ground concerned the extension of Howard’s detention by Detective Superintendent Gabriel O’Gara, whom the court accepted was involved in the investigation. The court held there was no requirement that an officer authorising an extension under section 50 of the Criminal Justice Act 2007 be independent of the investigation. It also found sufficient safeguards in the circumstances, including supervision by an independent member in charge and access to legal advice.
Finally, the court rejected a complaint about the jury directions on CCTV timings. The defence argued that footage from a Spar shop appeared to show a cyclist leaving the area before the alleged gunman left Pearse House. The appeal court concluded that the trial judge’s directions and follow-up reminder about timing evidence adequately addressed the issue. The appeal against conviction was dismissed.