The Court of Appeal has increased the prison sentences imposed on Eddie Murphy and James O’Brien after finding that the original terms for a severe assault and an attempted robbery were unduly lenient.
The court set aside O’Brien’s six-year sentence, with the final year suspended, for intentionally or recklessly causing serious harm. It substituted a sentence of six and a half years, backdated to when he entered custody.
Murphy’s sentence for the assault was increased from six years to seven and a half years. His separate sentence for attempted robbery was left unchanged at two and a half years, with the final 18 months suspended, and the terms remain consecutive. The court said the resulting aggregate sentence was eight and a half years.
The Director of Public Prosecutions sought review of the sentences imposed by Cork Circuit Criminal Court in November 2015. The Court of Appeal heard that the assault took place at Exchange Business Park on 28 April 2015. The injured man, van driver Mark Lahive, had picked up a metal bar from his work equipment and waved it at the two men, who confronted him, knocked him down and took turns beating him with the bar. They also kicked and punched him. An observer who tried to intervene was threatened.
Lahive suffered a depressed skull fracture, fractures to his arm, fingers and shin, and brain bruising that caused weakness in both limbs. His injuries were described as permanent and life-changing. He was unable to work or drive after a prolonged hospital stay and rehabilitation. The court also recounted the effects on his wife and children.
The attempted robbery occurred in December 2014 in a church car park on Western Road, Cork. The court heard that two men, including Murphy, demanded money and the driver’s car, then tried to pull him from it. He escaped by slipping out of his jacket.
The sentencing judge had identified nine years as the starting point for the assault before mitigation, but the Court of Appeal said a higher starting point would have been justified and that the mitigation applied had been very generous. It nevertheless said the sentencing judge had approached the task with care. The appeal court concluded that the overall sentences represented a substantial departure from the appropriate range and fell outside the judge’s margin of appreciation.
In resentencing, the court said O’Brien’s sentence would ordinarily have been at least seven years and Murphy’s aggregate sentence at least nine years. It imposed lower terms because increasing the sentences after the men were well into them would make their imprisonment more burdensome.