Garda murderer Aaron Brady did not react today when the Court of Appeal upheld his conviction for shooting dead Detective Garda Adrian Donohoe.
Brady's family, who have conducted a campaign insisting on his innocence, consoled one another when Mr Justice John Edwards made it clear that the three-judge court had not been persuaded by any of the nearly 50 grounds of appeal.
Wearing a navy suit and pink tie, Brady was quickly returned to the cell area by prison officers following the judgment.
It was, Mr Justice Edwards said, a difficult case and the appeal itself was the longest in the ten-year history of the court. The court's decision means that Brady will remain serving his life sentence with a minimum term of 40 years.
With remission for good behaviour, he will be allowed to apply for parole in February 2048, after he has spent 30 years in prison on the murder conviction.
In August 2020, Brady (33) formerly of New Road, Crossmaglen, Co Armagh was convicted by a jury of the murder of Det Gda Adrian Donohoe during a credit union robbery at Lordship, Bellurgan, Co Louth on January 25, 2013.
In today's 363-page judgment, Mr Justice Edwards dismissed all of the "broad panoply" of issues raised, including an argument by Brady that his trial should have been halted due to the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic.
In their arguments before the court, Brady's lawyers said their client's case remained the only one at hearing as the pandemic took hold and it was inappropriate for a jury to determine his guilt or innocence as people were dying from Covid-19.
His counsel, Michael O'Higgins SC, had said it was plausible that the jurors were worried about dying or about others close to them dying, which had deteriorated the quality of their deliberations.
In reply, Brendan Grehan SC, for the DPP, said there wasn't "an iota of a suggestion never mind evidence" that the jurors felt coerced to come to court and argued that no "unbearable burden" had been placed on them.
The Court of Appeal said today that the trial judge, Mr Justice Michael White, had "carefully applied his mind... and was clearly concerned about the unprecedented public health crisis faced by all and its impact on the appellant's right to a fair trial." Mr Justice White did not not err in directing the trial to proceed, the court found.
Daniel Cahill and Molly Staunton proved to be key witnesses in Brady's trial as they both testified that they heard Brady admit to killing a "guard" or a "cop" while Brady was living in the United States.
Due to covid restrictions in New York, "ad-hoc" arrangements were made for them to give their evidence via video-link.
Mr Justice Edwards said these arrangements "may not have been ideal" but were not an error "per se".
In the case of Daniel Cahill, the court found that Brady's lawyers had not shown that there was any unfairness or risk of an unfair trial.
The court also dismissed the defence's arguments regarding whether Mr Cahill had been offered an inducement by Homeland Security in America in return for his testimony.
Mr Justice Edwards said any such suggestion could be put to Mr Cahill in cross examination and it is for the jury to assess Mr Cahill's credibility.
Ms Staunton told the trial that she heard Brady say he had to "carry around the guilt of having murdered a cop in Ireland".
Ms Staunton said in her direct evidence that Brady also claimed during a drunken "rant" to be "the most feared man in Ireland".
In relation to Ms Staunton's evidence, the court found that the court was correct to allow the prosecution to treat her as a hostile witness when she appeared to resile from her evidence during cross examination.
When prosecution barrister Brendan Grehan SC showed Ms Staunton a video of her original statement to gardai, she returned to her original position that she had heard Brady admit to murdering a "cop".
Ms Staunton's evidence was also interrupted by her boyfriend, who was in her apartment while she testified.
Mr Justice Edwards said the interruptions did not pose a "real and substantial risk of an unfair trial".
He said any such risk was avoided by warnings given by the trial judge that "properly addressed the jury on the issue of who had responsibility for the interruptions, acknowledged the absence of supervision and referred to the interruptions as having been from the witness's boyfriend."
He added that the judge's remarks made it clear to the jury that the interruptions were not linked to Brady and ensured that the trial "while not perfect, was fair".
In the court's written judgment, Mr Justice Edwards wrote: "One must step back and analyse the consequences of these interruptions and, in our opinion, whether taking each interruption separately or together, the consequence was not a breach of the integrity of the trial and did not cause prejudice to the appellant, necessitating the discharge of this jury."
The court further rejected arguments that Brady's deportation from America in 2018 had amounted to a "de facto extradition" without the legal protections he would enjoy during an extradition process.
Mr Justice Edwards said this argument was "entirely without foundation" and the US authorities were entitled to deport Brady, who had been working for years in the US without a Visa.
Earlier this year Brady pleaded guilty to a charge that on a date between February 20 and May 7, 2020, within the State, he video recorded the playing of an interview between Ronan Flynn, a witness at his trial, and An Garda Siochana, thus embarking on a course of conduct intended to pervert the course of justice.
He is awaiting sentencing for that offence before the Special Criminal Court.
