Law professor Diarmuid Phelan found not guilty of murder of Keith Conlon

Barrister had pleaded not guilty to murder of trespasser on his Co Dublin farm

Mr Phelan (56), a senior counsel and law professor at Trinity College Dublin, has pleaded not guilty to the murder of Keith Conlon (36) at Hazlegrove farm, Kiltalown Lane, Tallaght, on February 24th 2022. Photograph: Collins Courts
Mr Phelan (56), a senior counsel and law professor at Trinity College Dublin, has pleaded not guilty to the murder of Keith Conlon (36) at Hazlegrove farm, Kiltalown Lane, Tallaght, on February 24th 2022. Photograph: Collins Courts

Law professor Diarmuid Phelan has walked free from the Central Criminal Court after a jury found him not guilty of the murder of a trespasser who died two days after Mr Phelan shot him on his Co Dublin farm.

The jury of nine men and three women returned with their verdict just after 4pm on Friday after total deliberations of about seven hours.

Relatives of Keith Conlon were in court for the verdict. One man blessed himself just before the verdict was delivered. All left court just as the verdict was delivered.

Mr Phelan sat impassively as the verdict was given. Members of his family, including his partner and his sisters, were in tears.

READ MORE

Death at Hazelgrove Farm: How law professor Diarmuid Phelan was acquitted of the murder of a trespasserOpens in new window ]

A senior counsel and law professor at Trinity College Dublin, Mr Phelan (56) had pleaded not guilty to the murder of Keith Conlon (36) at Hazelgrove farm, Kiltalown Lane, Tallaght, on February 24th 2022.

A father of four, Mr Conlon was critically injured when he was shot by Mr Phelan at the farm. He was pronounced brain-dead at Tallaght Hospital two days later.

The trial heard Mr Conlon was trespassing with two others – Kallum Coleman and Robin Duggan – on the farm that day. They had two dogs, a lurcher and a terrier, and were apparently engaged in badger baiting.

After hearing a dog barking for some time, Mr Phelan went to investigate and shot the lurcher with his licensed Winchester rifle.

The prosecution contended that led to heated exchanges with the trespassers and Mr Conlon and Mr Coleman followed Mr Phelan up a field.

The prosecution case was that Mr Phelan took his licensed Smith & Wesson revolver from his pocket, fired two shots into the air and a third penetrated the body of Mr Conlon. When the third shot was fired, Mr Conlon was shot in the back of the head as he turned away and, in the circumstances, Mr Phelan had the necessary intent for murder, the prosecution contended.

Roisin Lacey SC, with John Byrne SC, for the prosecution, said Hannah Felgner, a 19-year-old farmworker who witnessed the shooting had, “from beginning to end of her evidence” maintained that she saw a man with his back to Mr Phelan at the time of the fatal shot.

There was “nothing in the encounter” with the trespassers that could have led Mr Phelan to believe he was being presented with such a threat of force to justify producing a revolver from his pocket and to repeatedly fire that, she said.

Mr Phelan, in interviews with gardaí, said he believed, if he had not reacted immediately, “he would have got me”. He was “terrified”, he fired shots in an arc above the heads of the trespassers and was “stunned” when Mr Conlon fell down, he said.

Use of ‘route to verdict’ document may have helped clarify legal issues for Phelan juryOpens in new window ]

The defence contended the discharge of the firearm was a legitimate act of self-defence not done with intent to penetrate the body of Mr Conlon.

Mr Phelan was “outnumbered” and “facing imminent attack” by the trespassers who had told him earlier, after he shot the dog, “You’re f**ked” and they were going to get him, his counsel Seán Guerin, with Michael Bowman SC, instructed by solicitors Arthur McLean LLP, said.

The two men were “within a split second of doing just that”, Mr Phelan had “reached for what was at hand, his revolver”, had no time to think and fired three “warning” shots, the third hit and killed Mr Conlon but he never intended to hit him, counsel said.

It was “an unintended killing” only accidental in the sense some movement of Mr Conlon or the gun brought a bullet into contact with Mr Conlon, counsel said.

Evidence from firearms experts called by the defence showed the gun’s light weight, trigger pressure, repeated firing of it in short sequence, finger placement and movement of Mr Conlon and Mr Phelan could all explain change in the anticipated point of impact, Mr Guerin said.

Even if the prosecution proved the third shot was an aimed shot targeted at Mr Conlon, the use of force in what is described as legitimate defence, self-defence as prescribed by law, is a defence to murder and manslaughter, he said.

The defence asked the jury to consider the “vulnerability” of Mr Phelan in the context of criminality on his farm over years. There was a background of people coming on to the farm, including some who engaged in criminal damage, arson, theft, illegal dumping and drinking and taking drugs, the jury heard.

When the trial began before the jury and Ms Justice Lankford on October 16th, it was listed to last six weeks. It was in its tenth week when verdict was returned on Friday.

The jury began deliberations at 10.30am on Tuesday. Their deliberations had lasted about four hours when they were suspended just before 4pm, at their request, to resume at 1pm on Friday.

Due to juror unavailability, they were unable to sit on Wednesday, Thursday or Friday morning.

Each juror, when going out to consider the verdict, was provided by the judge with a written ‘route to verdict’ (RTV) document suggesting four questions for consideration, the answers to which could lead to one of three possible verdicts – not guilty; guilty of murder; or not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter.

The document set out the onus of proof is on the prosecution and the standard of proof is beyond reasonable doubt.

The issues addressed in the RTV document included ones concerning whether or not the prosecution had proven Mr Phelan had the necessary intent for murder – to kill or cause serious injury; whether or not he honestly believed he had to use force to defend himself and whether or not the force used was excessive, rendering it unlawful.

In a brief statement released later on Friday through a Garda family liaison officer, the family of Mr Conlon said they were “very hurt and disappointed at today’s verdict”. The family asked that their privacy be respected and said they had “no further comment to make”.

Mary Carolan

Mary Carolan

Mary Carolan is the Legal Affairs Correspondent of the Irish Times