The Court of Criminal Appeal refused Don Bullman leave to appeal his conviction for membership of the IRA, an unlawful organisation. It rejected each of the eight grounds he raised. The decision left in place his conviction and four-year prison sentence imposed by the Special Criminal Court.
The judgment, delivered by Finnegan J. on 28 July 2009, concerned a single count under section 21 of the Offences against the State Act 1939, as amended. The appeal court considered the trial record and arguments; it did not rehear the witnesses. It said it should not interfere with trial findings supported by evidence.
Bullman challenged the lawfulness of his detention and arrest at Heuston Station in Dublin on 16 February 2005. Gardaí had approached a jeep he was in and questioned its occupants while checking their identities and the vehicle. About ten minutes later, they arrested him under section 30 of the Offences against the State Acts 1939–1998. The Special Criminal Court had found that he was not detained before arrest, though he was discouraged from leaving the vehicle briefly. The appeal court held that the trial judges were entitled to reach that finding.
He also argued that questioning under section 2 of the 1998 amendment breached his right to silence and that the trial court drew improper inferences from his answers. The appeal judgment said the trial court was entitled to find that some answers were untruthful and to draw inferences from them in light of the other evidence. That evidence included text messages, the trial court’s finding that a box containing money was in Bullman’s holdall, and evidence about his contacts with other people. The judgment noted that no charges were brought against him concerning the currency, and that the trial court did not draw inferences under section 5 of the 1998 Act.
The court also rejected challenges to the use of belief evidence from Assistant Commissioner Michael McAndrew, including claims that privilege over the material behind his belief impaired the defence’s rights. The prosecution had offered the material to the trial court for inspection; the defence did not ask the court to inspect it. The appeal court held that the trial court was entitled to rely on the evidence within the safeguards it described.
The remaining grounds concerned whether events at Heuston Station or evidence of Bullman’s associations had improperly supported the conviction. The appeal court said the trial court used the station events as context for the questioning, and did not rely on the associations alone to draw an adverse inference. It found no factual basis for either ground. The court’s order was limited to refusing leave to appeal on all eight grounds.