The High Court refused John Dundon leave to seek judicial review of the Special Criminal Court’s decision not to adjourn his trial for the murder of Shane Geoghegan.
In a judgment delivered on 31 May 2013, Mr Justice Hedigan said there was no arguable case to challenge the decision. The application concerned the Special Criminal Court’s refusal on 15 May to postpone the trial, after Dundon sought an adjournment of about six months.
Dundon argued that the court had wrongly assessed the risk to prosecution witness April Collins, improperly weighed her right to life against his right to a fair trial, and that late disclosure left his defence unable to review the material in time. The disclosure included about 25,000 pages, 1,266 CCTV discs, two hard drives and a memory stick. The bulk was delivered on 2 May, about a month before trial.
The Special Criminal Court heard evidence from Detective Garda Treacy that a threat to Collins and her family was ongoing. The judgment records that the evidence was not challenged. The court also heard that most of the disclosed material had already been provided in earlier trials concerning Barry Doyle’s murder of Geoghegan. Of 55 new statements, 26 related to Dundon’s arrest, detention and interview; the detective said nothing of probative value had emerged from that process. He also said the CCTV contained nothing relevant to the defence and that material could be accessed as needed.
The Special Criminal Court considered the risk to the Collins family, the age of the case and the disclosure issues. It directed that it be told which material was new and indicated the trial court could decide whether a fair trial remained possible. It did not rule that late disclosure made a fair trial impossible.
Justice Hedigan said the High Court’s power to intervene in an ongoing criminal process was limited. He found the decision not to adjourn was based on evidence of an ongoing risk to the main prosecution witness, and rejected the claims that the Special Criminal Court had balanced two rights or that the disclosure established an unfair-trial risk requiring intervention at that stage.
He said the trial court had ample authority to address any substantial problems that emerged during the trial and ensure Dundon received a fair trial. The High Court refused leave to apply for judicial review; it did not decide the murder charge or the fairness of the trial itself.