The Court of Criminal Appeal dismissed Albie Lonergan’s appeal against his conviction for murdering his brother, Michael Lonergan, in Tralee in December 2006. The court rejected challenges to evidence about statements Michael made after he was stabbed and to the trial judge’s handling of an approach to a juror.
Albie Lonergan was convicted in the Central Criminal Court on 13 December 2007. The appeal judgment, delivered by Kearns J. on 8 May 2009, records that the stabbing happened outside a house at 58 Baloonagh Estate shortly after 6pm on 31 December 2006. Michael suffered three stab wounds and died later that day.
At trial, the prosecution relied on statements Michael made identifying his brother as the person who stabbed him. Witnesses described statements made shortly after the incident and after Emmet Coffey returned from pursuing the applicant. The defence objected to admitting statements made around 10 or 15 minutes after the stabbing, arguing they were no longer part of the res gestae.
The Court of Criminal Appeal said elapsed time was relevant but not decisive. The trial judge had to consider the circumstances, including whether there was a real possibility of concoction or distortion. The appeal court concluded that the statements made about 10 minutes after the stabbing were part of the same transaction and that Michael had no opportunity or identified motive to fabricate an explanation. It found the statements were correctly admitted. The judgment states that the prosecution relied on the res gestae exception, not the separate category of dying declarations.
The second appeal ground concerned a juror who said an unknown man approached him in a public house and told him, “I hope you make the proper decision next week”. The juror told the trial judge he was not intimidated and could continue to decide the case on the evidence. The defence argued on appeal that the judge’s questions led the juror and the jury towards a particular answer. The prosecution submitted that the applicant had not asked for the jury to be discharged.
Applying the objective test from *The People v. Mulder*, the appeal court found the incident had no effect on the juror and differed from the multiple incidents in that earlier case. It said the trial judge’s inquiry was appropriate and rejected the claim that he had coerced or directed the jury. The court dismissed this ground as well, leaving the conviction in place.