An appeal against a two-year sentence imposed on a man for violent disorder arising from an incident in which a young Dublin man was kicked and beaten to death after attending Club Anabel in Dublin was adjourned yesterday at the Court of Criminal Appeal following a complaint about a newspaper article.
Seán Mackey (23), South Park, Foxrock, Dublin, was sentenced to two years imprisonment on March 15th last after he was convicted of violent disorder.
The jury failed to reach a decision on a charge of manslaughter against Mackey and the DPP stated that he would not be proceeding with a retrial on that count.
Another man was jailed for four years for killing student Brian Murphy outside the Burlington Hotel in August 2000 while two others also received sentences for violent disorder.
When the three-judge Court of Criminal Appeal was due to start hearing the appeal against sentence yesterday, Mr Anthony Sammon SC, for Mackey, referred to an article published in The Irish Times on Wednesday. The article related to correspondence between Brian Murphy's father and the Director of Public Prosecutions.
Mr Sammon applied for an adjournment of the appeal hearing and said publication had been made so close to the appeal date that it created difficulty. He said perception was the issue about which his client was concerned.
In reply to the presiding judge, Mr Justice McCracken, Mr Sammon said his client appreciated that if the case was to be adjourned, he would remain in custody.
His client remained very much concerned that within days of his appeal, correspondence could be placed in the newspaper. His client was concerned about the purpose for which that was done.
Somebody had decided to go into the public domain with matters that ought not to have been put in the public domain, Mr Sammon said.
He was sure that the DPP did not expect the correspondence to be put in the public domain days before the appeal. It was a serious matter and he wished to have inquiries made.
Mr Edward Comyn SC, for the DPP, said he could see no reason why the hearing should not proceed. The appeal was against sentence only and, in that context, did not appear to touch on the criminal liability issue.
Mr Justice McCracken, sitting with Mr Justice O'Neill and Mr Justice Herbert, said it was not being suggested on Mackey's part that the members of the present court would be influenced by what was in the article. It was said, however, that there was a serious risk that there would be a public perception that justice would not be done regardless of what decision would be reached.
It was frequently said and it was a basic principle of the courts, that justice must not only be done but but must be seen to be done. The applicant perceived that justice might not be done.
For the DPP it had been submitted that there was no connection between the article and the appeal hearing. There was, of course, the unfortunate connection of the timing of the article days before the hearing.
Mr Justice McCracken referred to the contents of the article. In light of "this very unfortunate set of circumstances" the court believed, in fairness to the applicant and as it was at his request, there should be an adjournment.
The case was adjourned to the Court of Criminal Appeal's next list to fix dates on October 26th, with Mackey remaining in custody.