The Court of Criminal Appeal has refused Jonathon Tuohy and Darren Wallace leave to appeal their convictions for the murder and robbery of Noel Carmody.
In a judgment delivered on 5 December 2006, the court considered applications to set aside convictions returned by a jury after a trial at the Central Criminal Court in Limerick. Both men had been convicted unanimously of murder and robbery. Tuohy and Wallace received mandatory life sentences for murder and seven-year sentences for robbery.
The prosecution case was that the men acted together in the attack and robbery. Gardaí responding to emergency calls found Carmody severely injured in Arthur’s Quay Park in the early hours of 27 September 2003. He died in hospital later that morning. The judgment recounts evidence that a blood-covered metal bar recovered at the scene bore Wallace’s fingerprints, and that property belonging to Carmody was found with Wallace.
At trial, Tuohy admitted striking Carmody but relied on provocation. He testified that he had been drinking and taking Ritalin and ecstasy, and claimed he had encountered Carmody and another man in the park. Wallace denied striking Carmody. He said Tuohy attacked him with a bar and that he took it from Tuohy before Gardaí arrived. These were defence accounts recounted in the appeal judgment.
Tuohy argued that the jury’s verdict was unreasonable, that the trial judge’s remarks during a jury recharge prejudiced his defence, and that the judge erred in explaining the warning about uncorroborated confessions. The appeal court found there was ample evidence to support the verdict and said the disputed evidence and credibility questions were for the jury. It held that the judge’s explanation of the confession warning did not intrude on the jury’s role or prejudice Tuohy.
Wallace challenged the joint trial, the admission of evidence following a pre-trial hearing, the refusal to separate the robbery and murder counts, and directions to the jury on insanity and common design. The appeal court found no demonstrated prejudice from the joint trial and no error in the trial judge’s evidentiary rulings or jury directions.
Both men also complained that the jury had been told that Wallace spat at Garda Caragh Leahy outside court. The appeal court said the trial judge’s brief reference did not interfere with either man’s right to a fair trial. It added that, even if the point could have been decided in their favour, it was satisfied no miscarriage of justice had occurred.
The court therefore refused both applications for leave to appeal. The judgment records no change to the convictions or sentences.