The High Court refused to direct an inquiry into Walter Morrissey’s detention, ruling that the issues he raised about his criminal trial should have been brought before the Court of Criminal Appeal.
In a judgment delivered on 9 May 2017, Mr Justice Eagar said Morrissey was serving a lawful sentence and that relief under Article 40 of the Constitution did not arise. He nevertheless addressed his complaint about the prosecution’s closing speech at trial.
Morrissey said he was serving a 13-year sentence imposed from 9 January 2012 for aggravated sexual assault and assault causing serious harm. He had been convicted and sentenced in the Central Criminal Court and was imprisoned in Midlands Prison, the judgment said.
He argued that he had not received a fair trial. He said he dismissed his legal team during the trial because he believed the defence had not received full disclosure and telephone data, and that his lawyers had not fully cross-examined prosecution witnesses. He also complained that the judge allowed the prosecution to make a closing speech after he had discharged his lawyers. These were his claims; the judgment records no finding that disclosure was deliberately withheld.
The judgment recounts that, on the eighth day of trial, Morrissey’s counsel told the trial judge that Morrissey had discharged his solicitor and counsel could no longer represent him. Morrissey told the judge he was not capable of defending himself and wanted another legal team. The judge said the trial would continue and that Morrissey would have to represent himself if he did not retain his existing lawyers.
After the prosecution case closed, the trial judge explained that Morrissey could give evidence or remain silent, and that he would have an opportunity to address the jury. The prosecution sought to make a closing speech. The trial judge considered the Criminal Justice Act 1984 and a Court of Appeal decision, DPP v Byrne, before allowing it. The High Court later concluded that the prosecution was entitled to make a closing speech in circumstances where the accused had been represented and prosecution witnesses had been cross-examined by counsel.
The High Court’s order was limited to refusing an inquiry into the legality of Morrissey’s detention. It did not overturn his conviction or sentence.