Court postpones Redmond corruption trial

The High Court has granted a stay on the trial, which had been set for next Tuesday, of former Dublin assistant county manager…

The High Court has granted a stay on the trial, which had been set for next Tuesday, of former Dublin assistant county manager Mr George Redmond on charges alleging corruption.

The stay applies pending the High Court's determination of Mr Redmond's application for an order indefinitely postponing his trial at the Circuit Criminal Court.

The DPP yesterday asked the High Court to exercise its discretion and to discharge the leave granted to Mr Redmond last April to seek the order in judicial review proceedings.

Mr Redmond (78) is claiming that, because of extensive adverse media coverage of his affairs and conduct, it is not possible for him to be tried by an impartial and unbiased jury.

READ MORE

An earlier court hearing was told Mr Redmond was not seeking to permanently prohibit his trial but wanted prohibition until such time as "the prejudice that pertains at this time is spent". Yesterday, Mr Anthony Collins, for the DPP, asked the court to exercise its discretion and discharge the leave granted for the judicial review proceedings. He argued Mr Redmond had waited until the eleventh hour to come to the High Court.

Mr Collins said Mr Redmond could have brought his application for leave a year ago. He had been charged with the offences in April 2001 and was then well aware of the alleged prejudicial publicity, the bulk of which had occurred before he was charged.

Mr Patrick MacEntee SC, for Mr Redmond, said the DPP was asking the High Court to exercise its discretion without considering the essential question of whether or not there was a real danger that, in the events which had happened, Mr Redmond would be at risk of not getting a fair trial. A court would rarely exercise its jurisdiction without looking at the full facts or material before it, particularly when another High Court judge had already decided it was appropriate to allow judicial review proceedings to issue and had decided the application was brought in timely fashion, he added.

Mr MacEntee said the publicity material related to Mr Redmond began in January 1999 and had continued without cease through the Flood Tribunal. It had a serious and substantial revival in March this year.

Counsel said information was published when newspapers knew that Mr Redmond had been charged. Mr Redmond had had no option but to start the judicial review proceedings following the revival of publicity in March.

Mr Justice Ó Caoimh said Mr Redmond's application for leave to take judicial review proceedings was brought six or seven weeks before the date of his trial. This could not be categorised as inordinate delay.

If the material relied on by Mr Redmond had not included material of a more recent nature, that published in March, then the DPP would have demonstrated a clear basis for the relief he sought, the judge added. He granted a stay on next week's trial, gave Mr Redmond seven days to file a further affidavit in the High Court proceedings and adjourned the matter to June 6th to arrange a date for Mr Redmond's review application.