A UNIVERSITY lecturer who has admitted membership of the IRA lost an appeal yesterday against his conviction for plotting to plant a bomb in the UK.
Feilim O Hadhmaill, who was jailed for 25 years in 1994 after being found in possession of bombs, Semtex, arms and ammunition, claimed that he did not get a fair trial at the Old Bailey because the jury was pressurised into finding him guilty on a more serious conspiracy charge.
Mr Geoffrey Robertson QC, representing O Hadhmaill, told the Court of Appeal in London: "The jury were worried that if they were to reach a finding of not guilty, this man who had committed very grave crimes would walk free. This must have put a great pressure on the jury to find him guilty."
He said the judge at the trial, Mr Justice Rougier, should have allowed a lesser charge to be added of possessing explosives rather than the sole charge of conspiracy to cause explosions with intent to endanger life.
The Lord Chief Justice, Lord Taylor, who dismissed the appeal, will give his reasons later. He also reserved his decision on an appeal over sentence.
Mr Robertson said that O
Hadhmaill (38) came to Britain from Dublin in January 1994 to work as a lecturer at the University of Central Lancashire and was arrested in a service station near Wakefield, west Yorkshire, the following month.
He was found in a car which contained 17 kg of Semtex, two booby trap bombs, a pistol, and detonators and timers to make 17 more bombs. In his wallet, police found cigarette papers containing 274 names of possible targets, including military installations and MPs.
Mr Robertson said that O Hadhmaill had admitted that he was a member of the IRA and considered himself a political prisoner.
He had claimed at the Old Bailey that he did not intend to use the explosives because the Northern Ireland peace initiative was under way and was preparing to store them in woods near his home in Accrington.
On the final day of the trial, the jury had sent a note to the judge asking him what would happen to O Hadhmaill if they brought in a not guilty verdict.
The trial judge replied that was not their concern, only the verdict, said Mr Robertson.