The Court of Appeal has dismissed MW’s appeal against his conviction for assault causing harm, finding the trial satisfactory and the conviction safe. It also refused his motion to introduce handwritten witness statements as new evidence. The judgment did not decide his appeal against sentence.
A jury at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court convicted MW by a 10:2 majority on 2 July 2013 of assault causing harm under section 3 of the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997. He received a three-year prison sentence suspended on conditions for three years. The appeal judgment, delivered by Mr Justice Edwards on 1 June 2017, dealt only with the conviction appeal and the related evidence motion.
The charge arose from a 4 January 2012 incident at Busy Bees crèche on Kilmacud Road Lower. The prosecution case was that MW arrived to collect his young son after the child’s mother had withdrawn permission for him to do so. Crèche manager Marian Wallace and staff gave evidence that he became aggressive during a dispute over access to the child, tried to force his way through a door and headbutted Wallace, injuring her nose. MW denied assaulting her. He said Wallace pulled him down and that their heads collided accidentally.
The appeal raised nine grounds, including complaints about undisclosed witness statements, the Garda investigation, the jury directions and the prosecution’s presentation of injury evidence. The court accepted that several statements had not been disclosed before trial and called that regrettable, but found no deliberate withholding and no demonstrated prejudice sufficient to make the conviction unsafe. It said the differences between the early handwritten accounts and later statements did not amount to dramatic inconsistencies capable of changing the result.
The court also refused permission for further cross-examination based on those statements, concluding the proposed new evidence might not have had a material and important influence on the outcome. It dismissed the remaining grounds, including claims of witness contamination, jury confusion and unfairness in the investigation. It found no evidence supporting the allegation that the complainant’s Garda brother improperly influenced the investigation or prosecution.
The judgment records that the appeal against sentence was outside the issues it decided. The conviction appeal was dismissed.