A jury has been told to decide if a man’s responsibility for fatally stabbing his wife was diminished by a mental disorder brought on by a stroke.
Mr Justice Tony Hunt delivered his charge to the eight men and three women of the jury on Thursday in the murder trial of Alan Ward.
The Central Criminal Court judge said the only logical verdicts available were guilty of murder, not guilty of murder or guilty of manslaughter.
He suggested that the jury first consider whether the prosecution had proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr Ward intended to cause death or serious injury to Catherine Ward when he stabbed her.
Were they not satisfied that the accused had the necessary intent, the judge said, they must return a manslaughter verdict.
If they believed that the prosecution had proven Mr Ward intended to kill or cause serious injury, but that his responsibility was “substantially diminished” by a mental disorder, they should find him guilty of manslaughter, he said.
Mr Ward (54) has pleaded not guilty to the murder of Mrs Ward (41) at their home on Greenfort Drive, Clondalkin, Dublin 22 on March 1st, 2019. He has also pleaded not guilty to making a threat to kill or cause serious harm to his son Adam Ward,and not guilty to attempting to stab Adam Ward on the same date.
‘Terrible human tragedy’
Mr Justice Hunt described the case as a “terrible human tragedy”. He said a person would have to be made of stone not to be touched by what happened and to have sympathy for those involved.
He told the jury, however, that they must put emotion and sympathy aside and look at the evidence in a cold, unemotional way. The courts, he said, are here to “take things out of the emotional sphere”.
He told the jury to look at the evidence of former deputy State pathologist Dr Michael Curtis, who described multiple stab wounds, including a fatal stab wound that entered Ms Ward’s neck and travelled to a depth of 10cm, cutting her windpipe, damaging two arteries and entering her lungs.
An intention, the judge said, can be formed in an instant and a murder verdict does not require pre-meditation.
Mr Justice Hut said that Mr Ward’s lawyers had placed significance on the accused man telling gardaí “that’s not me” when asked about what happened to his wife during interviews following his arrest.
Mr Justice Hunt said the defence was asking the jury to interpret that as meaning that such behaviour was not normal for him.
The judge said intoxication was also an issue in the trial. He told the jury that a drunken intent is still an intent and intoxication is not a defence. But if Mr Ward’s level of intoxication was “so extreme” as to prevent him from forming an intent, he could not have the intent necessary for a murder verdict and would instead be guilty of manslaughter.
Mental disorder
Mr Justice Hunt said that if the jury finds that Mr Ward did intend to kill or cause serious injury to his wife, they must then consider the defence of diminished responsibility due to a mental disorder.
He said psychiatrists for the prosecution and defence agreed that Mr Ward had a mental disorder arising from a stroke he suffered in 2017.
He said for the jury to accept that Mr Ward is entitled to a manslaughter verdict based on diminished responsibility, the defence must prove that his culpability was “substantially reduced” due to his mental disorder. The standard of proof required of the defence is on the balance of probabilities, he said.
Mr Justice Hunt pointed out that Mr Ward had “a lot to drink” on the night but intoxication is not a mental disorder and does not form a defence. If the jury believes that the mental disorder played no part in Mr Ward’s actions, the diminished responsibility defence does not apply, he said.
The jury has spent about two hours considering their verdicts and will return to the court on Friday.