The High Court has ordered Keisha Harty’s surrender to the United Kingdom for prosecution over alleged wounding offences and an alleged failure to attend court while on bail. The order followed the court’s rejection of her remaining objections to surrender; it was not a decision on whether she committed the alleged offences.
The Trade and Cooperation Agreement warrant seeks Harty’s surrender to face prosecution. It concerns allegations of wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm and unlawful wounding, arising from an incident at a New Year’s Eve gathering in Birkenhead in the early hours of 1 January 2020. The warrant alleges that Harty attacked a woman with a broken wine glass, causing deep cuts to her face. These remain allegations for trial.
Harty had initially objected that the warrant lacked detail about the incident and the alleged bail offence, and that a possible life sentence raised concerns about her liberty rights. After receiving further information from the issuing authority and the Crown Prosecution Service, she withdrew two objections. The court dismissed them.
The court also rejected an argument that surrender was barred because the prosecution might not proceed if the complainant did not give evidence. The issuing authority confirmed the prosecution remained viable. The court said the prospect that the complainant might not testify did not displace the legal presumption that a decision had been made to charge and try Harty.
A further dispute concerned correspondence between the UK allegation of breaching bail and an offence under Irish law. The court considered information that Harty had been granted bail, was required to attend court when directed, and did not attend hearings on 15 July 2021 and 28 March 2022. It found that those acts, if committed in Ireland, would amount to failure to surrender to bail under section 13 of the Criminal Justice Act 1984. The court dismissed that objection.
The High Court concluded that surrender was not prohibited under the European Arrest Warrant Act 2003 or another provision considered in the case. It ordered Harty’s surrender to the United Kingdom under section 16 of the Act, for prosecution. The judgment did not determine guilt or sentence.