Jonathan Dowdall to ‘finally’ give evidence in Regency Hotel murder trial on Monday

Jonathan Dowdall, a former co-accused of Gerard ‘The Monk’ Hutch, who has turned State’s witness, will “finally” give evidence in the Regency Hotel murder trial on Monday, despite the status of his Witness Protection Programme (WPP) application remaining unknown, the Special Criminal Court has heard.

After the non-jury court was told on Friday that a decision regarding Dowdall’s proposed entry to the programme would not be made until mid-January, Mr Hutch’s barrister Brendan Grehan SC said his client was “anxious” that his trial proceed as he was not at all convinced about the timetable suggested or that it would necessarily “yield any fruit”.

Before Dowdall takes the stand on Monday, a detective superintendent will give evidence that the former Sinn Féin councillor’s admittance into the WPP is “separate and distinct and not tied in any way to his performance in the witness box”.

Mr Hutch (59), last of The Paddocks, Clontarf, Dublin 3, denies the murder of Kinahan Cartel member David Byrne (33) during a boxing weigh-in at the Regency Hotel in Dublin 9 on February 5th, 2016.

Why was Gerard Hutch tried for murder?

---

Gerard Hutch fails in bid to get State to pay legal costs following acquittal in Regency trial

---

Inside the Gerard Hutch PR machine: ‘Whether it was intentional or not, he did very well at marketing himself’

---

Gerard Hutch departs for Spain a month after acquittal of Regency Hotel murder

---

The court on Thursday ruled that the evidence to be given by Dowdall was admissible in the trial, despite defence objections. Dowdall intends to give evidence implicating Mr Hutch in the murder of Byrne. The former electrician has already been sentenced to four years by the three-judge court for the lesser offence of facilitating the murder and is being assessed for the WPP when he gets out of prison.

Mr Grehan has outlined that there are two pillars of Dowdall’s proposed evidence against his client, namely the handing over of the hotel key cards for a room in the Regency Hotel and “an alleged conversation” with Mr Hutch that took place in a park a number of days after the shooting. It was in this conversation that Dowdall says the accused confessed his direct involvement in the murder to him.

On Wednesday, Mr Grehan submitted that the issue as to whether or not Dowdall would be accepted into the WPP should be resolved before he gave evidence, so that he was not “under an apprehension or misapprehension that it’s based on performance”.

Presiding judge Ms Justice Tara Burns then directed Mr Gillane to find out if Dowdall had been accepted into the WPP. She on Thursday said she was “astonished” that the prosecution had still not been informed about this.

Prosecution counsel Seán Gillane SC told the three judges that Dowdall’s assessment for the WPP was ongoing and he could confirm that the current situation and uncertainty does not arise from “any difficulty” with Dowdall. Nor does it arise with anything internally in the programme, he added.

He said the assessment was “progressing at pace” but had reached a point where reports were required from external agencies with “people in disciplines which the court will be familiar with in terms of other trials”. The time in which these people could report was not within the control of the administrators of the programme, he said.

“I can confirm that all the relevant material that those people need to report has been transferred to them,” he said.

In those circumstances, Mr Gillane said there was a “very solid expectation” that the reports would be submitted before the end of the month. He went on to say that they had to be submitted before the next step which is when the review group makes a decision in terms of Dowdall’s “admission or rejection or neither”.

There was, the barrister said, a reasonable expectation that a decision would be made by the middle of January but that he was not going to offer the court a date because that would be “misleading” it.

Ms Justice Burns asked the prosecution counsel what his proposal was in terms of what the court did next.

Mr Gillane said he proposed that the court hear Dowdall’s evidence next week and that he had indicated this to Mr Grehan. “I know there is a view that this decision should be made before the evidence is heard and I submit that this is not necessary and there have been situations where this has occurred,” he continued.

Ms Justice Burns asked Mr Gillane: “Perhaps the court was under the misguided position that there would have been a decision in relation to this matter?”.

Mr Gillane said he always thought it would be part of a “calculated decision” and that he never thought Dowdall would be admitted to the programme within a week or two.

Mr Grehan said the defence simply had no information as to whether Dowdall was being accepted onto the WPP.

“We have nothing. We don’t have the first bit which is whether Dowdall was accepted into the programme and everything else is subsidiary to that,” he said.

Mr Gillane submitted that the average time it takes to be admitted into the WPP is about six months.

Ms Justice Burns said she did not accept this and that she had done a case with a protected witness and it was done “far more quickly”.

“The proposal is that we receive Mr Dowdall without a decision being made,” she said.

Mr Gillane said the prosecution had corresponded with the defence on October 13th and told them that Dowdall had not not been admitted into the WPP and no financial or material benefits had been afforded to him.

The judge said the “court knows nothing” and that the proposal was to proceed with Dowdall’s evidence without any decision being made.

Mr Grehan said Mr Hutch wanted his trial to proceed from the start even when they heard of Dowdall’s “circumstances” at the beginning of October.

“Since then the spectre of Dowdall giving evidence has hung over the trial in various ways,” he said.

The defence lawyer said that Dowdall’s testimony had been back loaded in the trial and they had never anticipated it would happen before December. “We did anticipate that a decision would be made and there would have been some transparency but that doesn’t appear to be the case.”

Mr Grehan suggested that the court rise until midday as he wanted to get “a very clear instruction” from his client on Mr Gillane’s proposal about proceeding with Dowdall on Monday “notwithstanding the lack of information”.

Having taken instructions from his client, Mr Grehan informed the three judges that Mr Hutch’s position is that he is anxious his trial should proceed as he was not at all convinced about the timetable suggested or that it would necessarily “yield any fruit”.

He said the defence had explained why it was that they would have liked to have known the information beforehand as “one of the things” was that Dowdall’s admittance into the WPP is “separate and distinct and not tied in any way” to the evidence he gives in the trial.

Mr Grehan suggested that the matter could be dealt with if Dowdall “finally” gives evidence on Monday by the court simply advising him at the beginning of his testimony that it understands he is being assessed for the WPP but that his admittance into it is “separate and distinct to his performance” in the witness box.

“I understand that to be the core condition of the WPP and that being the case we are happy to proceed on Monday,” he said.

Mr Gillane said his view was that the two things were “utterly unconnected”.

Mr Grehan suggested it would be “useful” that this come from the court rather than from Mr Gillane.

After the three judges rose for a few minutes to discuss them “taking a role” in the process, Ms Justice Burns said the court was “not anxious” to get involved in directing Dowdall into “what may or may not be the consequences of him giving evidence”.

“We don’t want to involve ourselves in advising him of matters we have no evidence of,” she said.

The judge said rather than the court giving a direction to Dowdall, a “more preferable way” would be that evidence be called in Dowdall’s presence on Monday from the appropriate person in the WPP.

“That also means Mr Grehan that if you have any questions you would also be in a position to cross-examine him. I presume the person is the chief superintendent over the programme,” she said.

Mr Gillane said a chief superintendent was available to give evidence by video-link on Monday or a detective superintendent could come into court to give direct evidence.

Mr Grehan said he would prefer a “live witness”.

Ms Justice Burns said the court would “prefer as high a level as possible” within the programme but that they would be happy to receive evidence from the Detective Superintendent.

The trial was adjourned until Monday, when Dowdall will take the stand.

Dowdall (44) - a married father of four with a last address at Navan Road, Cabra, Dublin 7 - was due to stand trial for Byrne’s murder alongside Mr Hutch but pleaded guilty in advance of the trial to a lesser charge of facilitating the Hutch gang by making a hotel room available ahead of the murder.

He has been jailed for four years for facilitating the Hutch gang in the murder of Byrne. His father, Patrick Dowdall, was jailed for two years before the Regency trial started after he also admitted his part in booking a room for the raiders.

Mr Hutch’s two co-accused - Paul Murphy (61), of Cherry Avenue, Swords, Co Dublin and Jason Bonney (50), of Drumnigh Wood, Portmarnock, Dublin 13 have pleaded not guilty to participating in or contributing to the murder of David Byrne by providing access to motor vehicles on February 5th, 2016.