The Court of Appeal has dismissed Seamus Morgan’s appeal against his conviction for murder, concluding that the trial was not unfair and the verdict was not unsafe.
Morgan was convicted on 19 January 2016 after a seven-day trial in the Central Criminal Court. The prosecution case relied on two witnesses who said they saw him assault Lawrence Keane with an object, described as a stick or bar, in St John’s Lane, Athy, shortly before Keane’s body was found. Blood on Morgan’s footwear matched Keane’s DNA, providing supporting circumstantial evidence.
At trial, the defence said Morgan had walked Keane to the end of the laneway to help him because he was unsteady and used a crutch, and that the fatal assault happened after they parted. The appeal challenged, among other matters, the trial judge’s decision to allow the prosecution to introduce Morgan’s previous convictions after the defence sought to raise convictions of the deceased. Morgan’s prior convictions included a manslaughter conviction in 2005.
The Court of Appeal agreed with the trial judge’s approach. It said the defence had not given advance notice of its intention to raise the deceased’s convictions and that the stated concern was that jurors might attribute witnesses’ reluctance or fear to Morgan. The court found no error in principle in allowing the prosecution to respond with evidence of Morgan’s convictions. It dismissed that ground of appeal.
The court also considered whether the jury had received an adequate warning about recognition evidence. It accepted that the warning was not strong or a “textbook warning”, but said the defence challenge had focused mainly on whether the witnesses were truthful, rather than whether they had mistakenly recognised Morgan. In those circumstances, the directions were adequate and the appeal ground failed.
Other complaints about the judge’s charge, including references to lighting, visibility, CCTV and forensic evidence, were described as ancillary. Reading the charge as a whole and alongside the judge’s responses to defence requests for further directions, the court found it adequate and appropriate.
The appeal judgment was delivered on 4 June 2021. After it had been reserved, the court raised a possible prior involvement by two members of the panel in an earlier trial involving Morgan. The parties were told they could seek a rehearing before a differently constituted court. Both sides informed the registrar that they had no objection to the panel delivering judgment.