The Court of Appeal has dismissed Andrew Heaphy’s appeal against his conviction for assault causing harm to Fran O’Dwyer, leaving his conviction and sentence in place.
Heaphy was convicted by a majority verdict after a three-day trial at Clonmel Circuit Court in May 2013. He received two years’ imprisonment, to run consecutively to a four-year sentence for arson imposed on 16 May 2013. The appeal concerned the conviction only.
Heaphy argued that the trial judge had improperly questioned two co-accused, Gary Heaphy and Siobhan Murphy, and that a comment about O’Dwyer’s jacket had undermined the defence. The Court of Appeal accepted that judicial intervention in questioning witnesses is generally undesirable, but found the questions here did not interfere with Heaphy’s defence or his right to a fair trial. It dismissed that ground.
The court said the questions came after the prosecution’s cross-examinations and did not interrupt the trial. Although the judge’s final question to Gary Heaphy about whether he had reported possible criminal damage had already been asked by prosecution counsel, no complaint was made at the time. The court considered that the judge’s further questions added little to the trial.
The second ground concerned the judge’s suggestion to the jury that O’Dwyer’s jacket might explain why he had no apparent injuries to parts of his body. The Court of Appeal noted that Heaphy had told gardaí O’Dwyer was wearing a jacket, and that O’Dwyer himself suggested in cross-examination that it had protected him. After the defence raised the point, the trial judge reminded the jury that Sarah Lane’s evidence was that O’Dwyer was not wearing a jacket when she got out of the taxi and saw him on the ground. The appeal court held that any possible unfairness was remedied by that clarification.
The judgment, delivered by Mr Justice Sheehan on 16 March 2015, dismissed the appeal against conviction. It did not reconsider or vary the sentence.