The Supreme Court has refused Keith Connorton’s appeal against his murder conviction, holding that the trial judge was entitled to admit an emergency services call made by a witness shortly after the stabbing.
The appeal concerned whether the recording of Claire McGrath’s call could be played to the jury as evidence. The Court concluded that it was admissible under the established res gestae exception to the rule against hearsay. It did not need to decide the prosecution’s alternative argument that recordings of emergency calls should qualify for a new exception because of modern technology.
Connorton was convicted by a 10–2 jury majority in the Central Criminal Court in December 2018 of murdering Graham McKeever at an address in Tallaght, Dublin, in February 2017. He was sentenced to life imprisonment. The Court of Appeal dismissed his challenge to the conviction in October 2021, and the Supreme Court granted leave to appeal on the evidence issue in October 2022.
At trial, McGrath testified that she and Connorton had been in a relationship and that she had begun seeing McKeever. She said she and McKeever were in bed when Connorton entered the apartment. A physical altercation followed, and McKeever was stabbed. The prosecution alleged Connorton inflicted the fatal wound.
McGrath’s emergency call included a statement that her ex-partner had entered, picked up a knife, stabbed McKeever and left. She later accepted that she had made the statement but said her description was not accurate. The trial judge first allowed the words to be put to her as a prior inconsistent statement. After a further hearing, the judge admitted the recording itself under the res gestae exception, reasoning that it was closely connected in time and circumstances to the incident. The recording was then played to the jury.
The Supreme Court said the relevant test asks whether the possibility of concoction or distortion can be disregarded, with timing considered alongside the circumstances. It noted that Connorton’s trial counsel had not challenged the call on that basis or cross-examined McGrath about possible concoction or distortion. The Court said the trial judge’s failure to expressly address that issue did not make the ruling fatal in the circumstances.
The Court therefore found no error in admitting the recording and refused the appeal. The judgment addresses that evidential ground; it does not set out a new general exception for emergency call recordings.