Judgment: 2019-10-22 · Court archive

Court of Appeal upholds Krzysztof Grzegorski murder conviction over violent Letterkenny killing

Court of Appeal ·

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • Bogdan Michalkiewicz
What

Court of Appeal upholds Krzysztof Grzegorski murder conviction over violent Letterkenny killing

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • 15 Westside Apartments
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

Grzegorski had pleaded not guilty to murder but guilty to manslaughter. The DPP rejected that plea and the case went before a Central Criminal Court jury. A co-accused was acquitted by direction after the trial judge found insufficient evidence linking him to the killing.

The Court of Appeal has upheld Krzysztof Grzegorski's conviction for the murder of Bogdan Michalkiewicz, who was killed during a prolonged and extremely violent assault at his Letterkenny apartment in May 2013.

Grzegorski had pleaded not guilty to murder but guilty to manslaughter. The DPP rejected that plea and the case went before a Central Criminal Court jury. A co-accused was acquitted by direction after the trial judge found insufficient evidence linking him to the killing.

Mr Michalkiewicz, aged 41, was killed at 15 Westside Apartments on 13 May 2013. The judgment records around 70 injury sites, including 46 to his head and face. His throat was cut and he suffered multiple stab and blunt-force injuries.

CCTV placed Grzegorski and his co-accused in the apartment block from 11.25am until 4.36pm. Grzegorski's fingerprints were also found inside the apartment.

The central defence issue was intoxication. Evidence showed that Grzegorski had been drinking heavily before, during and after the killing. After leaving Ireland, he sent a video admitting that he had inflicted the fatal wounds and saying his co-accused was innocent. He later went to a police station in England and said he wanted to confess to killing someone in Letterkenny.

During later Garda interviews, Grzegorski recalled entering the apartment, drinking, pushing the victim, taking a knife, stabbing him and knowing that he was dead, but said he could not remember what he had been thinking at the time.

On appeal, his lawyers argued that the jury should have been specifically told to accept his interview account if it could reasonably be true and to acquit him of murder if intoxication prevented murderous intent.

The Court of Appeal disagreed. It held that Grzegorski had never clearly said he was too drunk to form an intention to kill. The trial judge had correctly explained reasonable doubt, intent, intoxication and how competing inferences should be assessed.

The conviction appeal was dismissed.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review