The Gazette 1977

GAZ LTN - :

JANUARY/F IZ BRUARY 1977

revealed his identity, nevertheless there was no evidence whatever of that fact and there was no evidence on which knowledge of his being a Civic Guard could be attributed to the appcllants. Mr. Justice Walsh said the Spccial Criminal Court was of opinion that, as the appellants were guilty of murder, they were guilty of capital murder by reason of the fact that the person murdered was a member of the Gárda Siochána acting in the course of his duty. Dealing with the appellants' ground of application for leave to appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal, Mr. Justice Walsh said the Court came to the conclu- sion that the Criminal Justice Act, 1964. did not create any new offence and that, therefore the ingredients in relation to the mens rea, necessary to constitute the offence of murder, were identical with those necessary for capital murder and, consequently, that the absence of knowledge of the fact that the murdered man was a member of the Gárda Siochana was immaterial to the verdict. The Court of Criminal Appeal, however, felt that its decision necessarily involved a point of law of ex- ceptional public importance, and that it was desirable in the public interest, that an appeal should be taken to the Supreme Court. Mr. Justice Walsh said that the first point to be decided was whether, or not, the 1964 Act created a new offence of capital murder, or whether it simply continued the then existing offence of murder, so that the cffect of the Act was simply to remove the death penalty for some murders, and to leave it stand for other murders, including the murder of a civic guard in the course of his duty. New offencc on capital murder Mr. Justice Walsh said that, prior to the passing of the 1964 Act. there was no offence known to the law as capital murder. He thought it was a fair inference, that the Oireachtas bore in mind, when enacting this legislation that our Police Force was an unarmed Police Force, and had a special claim to whatever additional protection the law could give its members by providing the deterrent of the death penalty for violent criminals with whom members of the Gárda Siochána often had to contend. The same, or similar, considerations probably existed with regard to the murder of prison officers in the course of their duty. What was remarkable was that all the other categories of capital murder in the Act were what might be described as political murders, or politically-motivated murders. Mr. Justice Walsh said that up to the 1964 Act there had never been a murder of a member of the Gárda Siochána, in the course of his duty, otherwise than in the course of a "political" crime. It was to be noted that a person going to the aid of a member of the Gárda Siochána, in the course of his duty, was not protected in the,same way as the Gárda himself. This, to his mind, indicated that what the Oireachtas had in mind was (1) that an assailant who contemplated killing a Gárda would be aware that his punishment would be quite different from that which he would incur by killing a private citizen and (2), that if that was to have a deterring effect, it would have it only if the assailant was aware that his prospective victim was a Garda. Mr. Justicc Walsh said it was a fair inference that the bank robbers were prepared to kill, if necessary, in the course of the robbery, and the flight from it, and that if. in a confrontation with civilians and police, the success of their flight depended on killing someone, the victim was more likely to be a member of the

THE MURRAY CASE This vital decision of the Supreme Court is of capital importance. In view of its length, it was not found practicable to include it in the green pages. It wll not be officially reported for at least one vear. In view of the demand, particularly by law students, it has been de- cided to publish it as an ordinary article. Death Sentence on Noel Murray quashed because he had °o gun, and was not guilty of capital murder Marie Murray will stand new trial on question of recklessness The Supreme Court has, on 9 December, quashed file conviction and sentence of death on Noel Murray for the capital murder of Garda Michael Reynolds a nd substituted a conviction for murder, with a sen- tence of life imprisonment, and ordered a retrial on a charge of capital murder of his wife, Marie Murray. The couple had been convicted of the capital murder of the Garda in St. Anne's Park, Rahenv, Dublin, in September 1975, following an armed bank robbery a t Killester and were sentenced to death in the Special ^riminal Court. Their appeal was dismissed, but the Court granted them a certificate of leave to appeal to file Supreme Court, and their appeal was heard on the first three days of November. The judgments, which totalled about 25.000 words, and examined the legal Position in several other countries, had been completed to five weeks. These were five separate judgments delivered which T all took three hours to read in the crowded Court- 1 >om. Mr. Justice Henchy, Mr. Justice Griffin, Mr. 'Jstice Kenny and Mr. Justice Parke held that the test Jj guilt was whether the accused intended to kill a Uarda, or was reckless as to whether his victim was a Uarda. Mr. Justice Henchy, Mr. Justice Griffin and Mr. Justice Parke held that there should be a retrial of Marie Murray on the capital charge, as there was evidence on which the trial Court could find that she JJas reckless. Mr. Justice Griffin, in his judgment, said JJat there should be a retrial of Noel Murray also on jfto capital murder charges as the trial Court could *tod that he was reckless. Mr. Justice Kenny said there no evidence of recklessness against either Noel or Marie Murray, so they should be found guilty of tourder and not capital murder. .Mr. Justice Walsh. President of the Court, in his Jjfigment, said that both should be found guilty only * murder, as the test for capital murder was whether ^accus ed actually knew that the victim was a Garda. . Mr. Justice Walsh, who presided, said there was no oubt, whatever, that on the evidence adduced at the jjtol each of the Murrays was guilty of the murder of Reynolds. c R degrees of guilt had to be indicated then, on the J^fience, Marie Murray was by far the more guilty. On J* evidence, she wilfully, and without request from J, 1 " husband, undertook to rescue him from Garda ^toolds whom she killed to elfect her purpose. . ^t ot was in issue was whether, on the evidence and the circumstances of the case, the verdict of capital «^dcr found by the Spccial Criminal Court against j a ppcllants could be sustained. l R Was clear that this case must be approached on the , s, s that neither appellant was aware that the victim M a member of the Garda Siochana, or that he was "JjjR in the course of his duty, ^^h i le it might very well "be that the Gárda, as he e w close to the robbers, called on them to stop and 18