A back-seat passenger who allegedly reached forward and pulled at the steering wheel of a car, causing a collision in which his cousin died, can be put on trial in relation to the incident, the Supreme Court has ruled.
The court, by a four-to-one majority, yesterday cleared the way for the trial of the man charged with intentional or reckless conduct in relation to the incident in Ballybrack, Co Dublin, over eight years ago.
Jason Wall, with an address in south Dublin, was a back seat passenger in a car in which five young people were travelling after leaving a christening party on August 14th, 2005.
At Church Road, Ballybrack, he is alleged to have pulled the steering wheel of the car driven by his girlfriend Lyndsey Hudson, creating a risk of death or serious harm to another.
It is alleged Mr Wall reached forward, grabbed the steering wheel and pushed it to the right causing the car to cross to the wrong side of the road and collide with another car.
The front seat passenger in the car, Emma Wall (18), from Shankill, Dublin, died. She was a cousin of Jason Wall.
Mr Wall had brought proceedings aimed at preventing his trial on grounds that the Garda failure to conduct fingerprint tests on the steering wheel and to preserve the cars involved in the incident for inspection created a real risk of an unfair trial.
In separate judgments yesterday, Chief Justice Ms Justice Susan Denham, Mr Justice Donal O’Donnell, Mr Justice Frank Clarke and Mr Justice John MacMenamin rejected those claims and directed the trial should proceed.
In his judgment, Mr Justice O’Donnell said the fundamental facts in the case were that a woman was killed and others injured as a result of a manoeuvre which caused the car to cross to the wrong side of the road and collide with another car. The issue was what caused that.
Of the five people in the car, one was dead and two – Ms Hudson and Stephen Wall – had made statements saying Jason Wall had grabbed the steering wheel, causing the driver to lose control.
If the trial proceeded, the two would give oral evidence, would be cross-examined and those statements would be considered in the context of all the evidence in the case, he said.
Mr Justice Frank Clarke agreed that the jurisprudence in the area of “missing evidence” should be re-examined.
The Chief Justice rejected arguments the evidence against Mr Wall would be circumstantial and ruled Mr Wall had failed to prove he was exposed to the risk of an unfair trial. Mr Justice MacMenamin agreed.
However, in his judgment, Mr Justice Hardiman said no explanation had been provided as to why gardaí had not gathered fingerprint evidence, and had ensured the vehicle was rendered forever unavailable 11 days after the accident. These were “extraordinary acts and omissions” by the Garda.
In those and other circumstances, including that initial statements by Ms Hudson and Stephen Wall did not inculpate Jason Wall, he believed there was a real risk of an unfair trial.
