The Court of Appeal has dismissed Gary Campion’s appeal against his conviction for the murder of Brian Fitzgerald, leaving his mandatory life sentence in place.
A unanimous jury found Campion guilty in November 2007 after a trial in the Central Criminal Court. He had been tried with three co-accused over Fitzgerald’s death on 29 November 2002. The appeal judgment, delivered by Birmingham J. on 31 July 2015, concluded that the jury was entitled to reach its verdict and that the appeal court could not interfere.
The prosecution case relied centrally on James Martin Cahill, who had pleaded guilty to the murder and testified that he was the gunman. The case against Campion was that he was present during the killing and assisted Cahill. The defence challenged Cahill’s competence and reliability, citing his accounts of hearing voices, speaking to the television, admitting lies and changing parts of his account. It argued that the trial judge should have required a psychiatric assessment or withdrawn the case from the jury.
The Court of Appeal said the trial judge had no power to order Cahill to undergo an assessment, a point accepted by the parties. It held that the jury was responsible for assessing his credibility, having heard his evidence and received strong warnings about the dangers of relying on an accomplice without corroboration. The appeal court considered the judge, who had observed the trial, better placed than an appellate court reading transcripts to decide whether the case should go to the jury.
The court also rejected challenges concerning handwritten psychology notes and the jury directions on supporting evidence. It found the prosecution had provided the notes in its possession, alongside later formal reports. CCTV footage said by the prosecution to show Campion near his home with a motorcycle was capable of being supportive evidence; whether it supported or corroborated the prosecution case was for the jury to decide. The court said the judge’s direction on the sequence for considering evidence was, if anything, unduly favourable to the defence.
The jury had acquitted Desmond Dundon and Anthony Kelly, for whom the court said there was no corroboration of Cahill’s evidence, and John Dundon had been acquitted earlier by direction of the trial judge. The appeal court stressed that Campion’s case differed because other evidence was capable of corroborating Cahill and further evidence supported the State case. It dismissed the appeal.