The Court of Appeal has dismissed Richard Bourke’s appeal against the severity of an 11-year sentence imposed for setting fire to the family home of Detective Garda John Griffin. The court found no error in the sentencing judge’s conclusion that the offence involved premeditation and dismissed the appeal without increasing the sentence.
Bourke had pleaded guilty to four counts: three of criminal damage and one of theft. The 11-year sentence was imposed on count one, relating to the fire at the Griffin home, with the final three years suspended on conditions. An eight-year sentence on a second criminal damage count was concurrent. Both sentences were backdated to 28 February 2019. The remaining counts were taken into consideration.
The Court of Appeal heard that the fire was set during the small hours while the Griffin family were at home. A smoke alarm woke Mrs Griffin, and she and her husband extinguished the flames. The court said the family had been at grave risk if the fire had spread through the house. The sentencing judge had found that Bourke was motivated by a grudge connected to a criminal investigation about 20 years earlier, in which Griffin had been involved.
Bourke argued that the offending was spontaneous and occurred while he was heavily intoxicated after a domestic argument. He said the trial judge had wrongly treated it as premeditated and that the sentences were excessive. The prosecution relied on Bourke’s interview account and CCTV evidence, which showed him returning to the house with petrol after an initial fire failed to take hold. In interview, he said he knew Griffin lived there and referred to having been charged with murder before being found not guilty.
The appeal court accepted that the sentencing judge had properly considered mitigating circumstances, including Bourke’s guilty plea, difficult childhood, work history, family commitments, mental health difficulties and problems with alcohol and drugs. It also noted his previous convictions and the seriousness of the risk to the family.
The court said purchasing petrol and Bourke’s longstanding grievance supported the finding of premeditation. It described the sentence as one that could be characterised as lenient, if not unduly so. Although the court said it had power to quash the sentences and increase the prison term, it decided, with some hesitation, simply to dismiss the appeal.