The Court of Criminal Appeal has dismissed Sean Mackey’s appeal against a two-year prison sentence for violent disorder arising from an assault outside Dublin’s Burlington Hotel in which 18-year-old Brian Murphy died.
In a judgment delivered on 24 November 2004, the court rejected Mackey’s arguments that the sentencing judge had wrongly treated him more harshly than co-accused Desmond Ryan and had relied on or overlooked evidence improperly. The appeal court said the trial judge had justified the difference in sentences and had weighed the relevant aggravating and mitigating factors carefully.
Mackey and three co-accused had faced charges of manslaughter and violent disorder. A jury convicted Mackey of violent disorder in February 2004 but could not agree on the manslaughter count. The Director of Public Prosecutions later decided not to seek a retrial on that charge. Mackey was sentenced to two years’ imprisonment on 15 March 2004.
The incident happened outside the Burlington Hotel, where nightclub Annabel’s was attached, in the early hours of 31 August 2000. The judgment says Murphy was assaulted by several young men, suffered multiple facial injuries and died after being taken to hospital. The trial judge described Mackey’s kick to Murphy’s body while he was on the ground as a serious assault, though not life-threatening.
Ryan, who was convicted of both manslaughter and violent disorder, received four years for manslaughter and a concurrent two-year sentence for violent disorder. Desmond Ryan was acquitted of manslaughter and received nine months for violent disorder, with the prison warrant deferred until after his university examinations. The appeal court said the trial judge had distinguished Ryan’s conduct because he did not contribute to the earlier escalation and gave immediate assistance to Murphy after the incident.
The appeal court considered witness evidence and Mackey’s own statements to Gardaí. It noted that an independent witness described Mackey returning to the group and kicking Murphy in the body, then running back to friends. The court accepted that there were difficulties in taxi driver William Quigley’s account of a conversation he said he overheard, but found his description of Mackey as “hyper” was consistent with Mackey’s own account of his mood after the kick.
The court held that the trial judge could consider Mackey’s participation throughout the incident, including his contribution to its escalation, even though the prosecution had accepted that he had not committed an offence before others joined the assault. It found no unjustified disparity in the sentences and no error in principle in the trial judge’s assessment. The appeal was dismissed; the two-year sentence remained in place.