Judgment: 2001-07-05 · Court archive

Supreme Court refuses to halt Cork assault prosecution despite finding excessive delay

Supreme Court ·

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Anthony McNamara
  • Sean Manning
  • Mr Justice Francis D. Murphy
What

Supreme Court refuses to halt Cork assault prosecution despite finding excessive delay

Where

No place detail is included in this summary.

When

Judgment:

Other dates in the report
  • 15 August 1992

    The charges arose from an incident alleged to have happened at about 2am on 15 August 1992. The prosecution alleged that McNamara, with several other youths, chased and attacked Sean Manning, who was punched and kicked while on the ground and sustained injuries requiring several days in hospital.

  • 14 November 1994

    He was not formally arrested and charged, however, until 14 November 1994, with the book of evidence served the following month. The State Solicitor said the Garda file had reached him in June 1993 and that preparation of a book involving 35 witnesses and 36 exhibits took almost another year.

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The Supreme Court has refused to stop the prosecution of Anthony McNamara over an alleged assault at Pope's Quay in Cork, despite finding that an excessive and inadequately explained delay occurred before he was charged.

By Ruth Mercer

The Supreme Court has refused to stop the prosecution of Anthony McNamara over an alleged assault at Pope's Quay in Cork, despite finding that an excessive and inadequately explained delay occurred before he was charged.

The charges arose from an incident alleged to have happened at about 2am on 15 August 1992. The prosecution alleged that McNamara, with several other youths, chased and attacked Sean Manning, who was punched and kicked while on the ground and sustained injuries requiring several days in hospital.

McNamara was questioned shortly after the incident and arrested within days, with clothing taken for forensic analysis. The Supreme Court noted that most of the Garda investigation appeared to have been completed by the end of August 1992.

He was not formally arrested and charged, however, until 14 November 1994, with the book of evidence served the following month. The State Solicitor said the Garda file had reached him in June 1993 and that preparation of a book involving 35 witnesses and 36 exhibits took almost another year.

Mr Justice Francis D. Murphy said that explanation did not adequately justify the delay and described it as excessive.

The decisive issue, however, was prejudice. McNamara argued that the passage of time had impaired his memory and made it difficult to reconstruct his movements on the night in question.

The court found those assertions too general. McNamara had been questioned and arrested soon after the alleged incident, circumstances which the judge considered would have focused his attention on the events. No specific defence, missing witness or other concrete disadvantage caused by the delay was identified.

The ruling therefore settles only whether the prosecution should be prohibited because of delay. It does not determine McNamara's guilt or innocence on the assault charges. The appeal was dismissed and the High Court order allowing the prosecution to proceed was affirmed.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review