The Court of Criminal Appeal refused an application by Eamon Cooke to add grounds to his pending appeal and to introduce further evidence about the purchase and occupation of a house connected to some of the offences for which he was convicted.
The judgment, delivered by Geoghegan J. on 15 March 2006, concerned an application for leave to appeal against 33 convictions relating to sexual offences involving four female persons. The court was considering a motion made before the leave application was heard; it did not determine the appeal itself.
Cooke sought to add grounds concerning access to transcripts of child care proceedings, alleged unfairness in the admission of a document from those proceedings, the trial judge’s handling of alleged prior misconduct evidence, and the judge’s charge to the jury. The court said there were no exceptional circumstances to justify adding the grounds. It noted that objections to the matters now raised had not been made at trial and that the transcript had been available for Cooke to seek before trial.
Cooke also sought to rely on evidence from his former solicitor, Tim McEniry, that the house purchase closed on 27 July 1987 and that Cooke received the keys seven to 10 days later. The proposed evidence was intended to challenge alleged dates for some offences and, alternatively, the complainants’ credibility. The court said the evidence could have been obtained with reasonable diligence for the trial and was unlikely to have an important influence on the result.
A statement from Martin Fahey, who said he had been the house’s vendor and remained living there until 31 July 1987, was produced by the prosecution on the morning of the motion hearing. There was no formal application to introduce his evidence. The court nevertheless heard submissions on the issue on a provisional basis, then refused the informal application and said it would not entertain a later formal application. It also considered Fahey’s proposed evidence obtainable with diligence and unlikely to affect the verdicts.
The court said the house’s occupation dates related to allegations involving FG and CG, but would form only a small part of the trial evidence. It refused both the request to add appeal grounds and the applications to adduce the further evidence. The judgment did not decide whether Cooke would receive leave to appeal or alter any conviction.