The Court of Appeal has dismissed Seamus Murphy’s appeal against his convictions for assaulting a peace officer and obstructing traffic, finding no basis to doubt the fairness of his trial or the safety of the convictions.
The judgment, delivered by President Birmingham on 11 June 2018, concerns convictions recorded on 5 July 2016. Murphy received a three-year prison sentence, suspended in relation to the assault offence, on 28 October 2016. The traffic obstruction charge was taken into consideration at sentencing. The indictment had also included charges of a further assault on a peace officer and dangerous driving; the jury found Murphy not guilty of both. The conviction for assault concerned Garda Sergeant James Murphy.
The appeal followed events soon after midnight on 14 July 2013 at Garrynagran, Moygownagh, County Mayo. The prosecution alleged that Murphy drove a tractor and mower slowly to prevent a jeep carrying John J. Heffron and his son, Darragh, from passing, and reversed towards it. After Gardaí arrived, the prosecution said Murphy resisted arrest and assaulted Sergeant James Murphy. The dangerous driving charge arising from the alleged manoeuvres ended in a not guilty verdict.
Murphy raised several grounds of appeal, including the trial judge’s response to a jury question about a faint blue line on a photograph, remarks by prosecution counsel in closing, and Sergeant Murphy’s reference to a Garda Síochána Ombudsman Commission (GSOC) investigation during cross-examination. The defence had argued that the GSOC answer was hearsay and opinion evidence and asked the trial judge to discharge the jury. The Court of Appeal said the answer was inappropriate but held that the trial judge was entitled to refuse to discharge the jury.
On the blue line, the appeal court said the judge had followed defence counsel’s request to tell jurors not to concern themselves with it. It said reminding jurors of the expert’s evidence might have been preferable, but the issue could not justify quashing the conviction. The court also concluded that prosecution counsel’s pointed remarks did not require the judge to discharge the jury or take another specific action.
The court said the appeal arguments had been considered in full and did not undermine the trial’s fairness or the convictions’ safety. It dismissed the appeal against conviction. The judgment addresses the convictions; it does not set out a separate order changing the sentence.