The murder trial of Joe O'Reilly came close to collapse yesterday after it was revealed a portion of the book of evidence had been discovered in the jury room.
Mr O'Reilly (35), of Lambay View, Baldarragh, the Naul, Co Dublin, has pleaded not guilty to murdering 30-year-old Rachel O'Reilly, the mother of their two children, at the family home on October 4th, 2004.
Before the jury returned from lunch yesterday, Mr Justice Barry White told the court that the jurors had noticed the book of evidence in their room when they came into court that morning.
He said they brought its presence to the court's attention when they asked the registrar whether it was meant for them.
Mr Justice White then asked prosecution and defence counsel whether they would be happy to proceed with the trial if the jurors promised they had not read any portion of it.
Both counsel agreed they would be happy to proceed on that basis and the jury was called back in.
Before asking them if they had read any part of the book of evidence, the judge explained its function and significance.
He said the book of evidence was the term given to a book of statements prepared by the Director of Public Prosecutions containing a list of witnesses and their statements.
"The book of evidence is not a document which is intended for the jury's use," he explained. "There may be documents [in it] which are not legally admissible."
He said, for example: "A garda may take a statement from a witness and that statement may not be admissible."
He said the book may also contain hearsay evidence which is "not permitted in our courts".
"I understand somehow or other, the book of evidence made its way into the jury room and that it was there this morning and brought to the attention of the registrar," he said.
"I must ask, did any one of you read any complete part or any portion of a statement contained within that book of evidence?"
The jurors collectively shook their heads and said "no" or "definitely not". He told them that if they had read any part of it, he would have had to discharge the jury and end the trial.
Mr Justice White then asked counsel whether they were happy to go on after hearing the jurors' reassurances. Both the defence and the prosecution agreed to proceed with the trial.