The High Court has refused to stop the prosecution of Aaron Doyle over offences dating from August 2003, finding that a delay of just over two years before he was recharged did not deprive him of his right to a fair trial.
Doyle was first arrested on 6 August 2003 and appeared before the District Court two days later. The District Court declined jurisdiction in September 2003. The proceedings were then struck out on 9 October because the book of evidence was not ready.
Further Garda enquiries followed. Doyle, who was serving a sentence on unrelated charges from March 2004, repeatedly wrote to Gardaí and the Director of Public Prosecutions seeking to be recharged. The Garda file reached the DPP's office in July 2004. Further investigative work was directed, additional proofs were obtained and a direction to recharge Doyle issued on 31 March 2005. He was eventually recharged on 20 July 2005.
Doyle sought judicial review, arguing that the delay would prevent him obtaining a fair trial. Mr Justice de Valera accepted that an accused has a constitutional right to a reasonably expeditious trial, but said the question had to be assessed in the circumstances of the individual case.
The judge divided the period into four stages. He found that the initial investigation concerned a very serious alleged offence and required the gathering of witness and technical evidence. The later periods involved DPP consideration, further Garda inquiries and preparation of a new book of evidence and charges.
Although the final four-month period was not especially rapid, the court held that the prosecution process as a whole met the standard of reasonable expedition.
The judge also found no evidence of actual prejudice to Doyle. He concluded that the delay would not prevent a fair trial and refused the application to restrain the DPP from proceeding.