A man facing manslaughter and other charges arising out of a road incident in Cork in which two people died failed yesterday to have his trial transferred from Cork to Dublin.
Counsel for Mr David Todd claimed his client could not get a fair trial in Cork because of the unprecedented publicity about the incident.
Mr Justice Geoghegan refused to grant an order transferring the trial. He reserved judgment on an application to have Section 32 of the Court and Court Officers Act, 1995, declared unconstitutional.
The section permits a Circuit Court judge to transfer a case to another court if he is satisfied it would be manifestly unjust to try the accused locally.
Mr Barry White SC, for Mr Todd, said this section stated that the Circuit Court's decision to transfer or not was final.
He claimed that a section which was both binding and unappealable was clearly unconstitutional. Counsel said Mr Todd, of St Michael's Road, Farranree, Cork, was due to face trial on indictment in Cork Circuit Criminal Court on a number of offences, including manslaughter, in connection with a traffic incident in Cork on March 17th, 1997, in which two young people, Trevor O'Connell and Stephen Kirby, died.
In judicial review proceedings, Mr White applied to have the case transferred to Dublin on the basis that Mr Todd could not get a fair trial in Cork because of the "extraordinary and unprecedented" publicity. He said there had been attacks on the home of the accused, a public demonstration had taken place in the city in which thousands of people participated, and a local paper had put up a reward to apprehend the culprits.
Refusing the application to transfer the trial, Mr Justice Geoghegan said Judge Anthony G. Murphy had turned down the request for a transfer and had given his reasons for doing so.
Judge Murphy's decision was a reasoned one in which he explained that the jurors likely to be called would not be from the same area as the victims. It was not unreasonable to conclude that such a jury, properly directed, would come in with a fair verdict.
Judge Murphy's decision was a well-thought ruling, one he would only interfere with if it had been irrational, Mr Justice Geoghegan said. On the contrary, it had been a very good decision and he was not going to review it.
He noted that Judge Murphy had based his decision on an examination of the last jury panel, and said the panel might be different on the next occasion. He would direct that the judge trying Mr Todd's case, whether it was Judge Murphy or another, should ensure to the best of his ability that the jury would not consist of people from the area from which the victims had come.