The Court of Appeal has dismissed Dermot Griffin’s appeal against his manslaughter conviction over a fatal fire in a makeshift den in Tallaght in 2001. The judgment, delivered by Mr Justice Birmingham on 23 March 2018, found that the appeal grounds did not make the trial unfair or render the verdict unsafe.
Stephen Hughes, 12, died after the den between 2 and 4 Rossfield Avenue caught fire at about 5am on 1 September 2001. Daryl Hall, 14, who was also sleeping there, escaped. Griffin was convicted after a trial lasting about 13 days in May 2014.
The prosecution case included CCTV showing an unidentified man approaching the den shortly before it caught fire. Witnesses gave evidence about Griffin’s movements and statements that night. Tracey Deegan, his then partner, testified that he left their home twice, said he intended to burn the hut and later told her he had done so. Linda Prentice testified that she saw Griffin ignite an object and throw it into the den. James Farrelly said Griffin threatened to kill him if he spoke about seeing him. The court’s judgment describes these witnesses’ evidence and the defence challenges to its reliability; the jury had heard about inconsistencies and witnesses’ heroin use.
Griffin sought to introduce fresh evidence after Shane Butterly came to a Garda station in January 2016 and said he had killed Stephen. Butterly later denied any role in the fire, telling Gardaí he had been ill and without medication when he made the earlier statement. The Court of Appeal said the retracted statement could not be admitted as evidence and refused leave to add the proposed ground of appeal.
The court also rejected challenges concerning trial publicity, a juror whose relatives served in An Garda Síochána, witness evidence and re-examination, disclosure of a 2006 prosecution direction, and the trial judge’s refusal to direct an acquittal. It held that the prosecution evidence, despite difficulties and inconsistencies, was properly left for the jury to assess. It also found no basis to overturn the conviction because of the combined effect of the complaints.
The court dismissed the appeal. The judgment does not report a new sentence or other order in this appeal.