Three young men were responsible for a 19-year-old man "drowning in his own blood" and should be convicted of his murder, a prosecution lawyer told a jury yesterday.
At the Central Criminal Court Mr Tom O'Connell SC, for the prosecution, was addressing the jury at the conclusion of the trial of Mr Brian Willoughby (24), Orwell Park, Templeogue, Dublin, Mr Neal Barbour (20), Domville Road, Templeogue, and another teenager who cannot be named for legal reasons.
Mr O'Connell told the jury that the "critical issue" in the case was the question of each man's intent on the night of the killing.
The three deny the murder of Mr Brian Mulvaney on March 11th, 2000, at Templeogue.
The primary cause of his death was from a large amount of blood in his lungs which he could not cough up, because he was knocked unconscious.
"If you are satisfied that the three intended to cause him serious injury then you convict of murder. If intent of any of the three is less than to cause serious injury, the proper verdict is manslaughter," Mr O'Connell said.
While most of the evidence in the case was not disputed, the reason Mr Mulvaney had lost consciousness in the first place was contested. The effect of a level of ecstasy in his blood was disregarded by the State, which says the beating caused the victim to lose consciousness.
"It is an extraordinary coincidence, fanciful even, that just at the moment he got a severe battering somehow or other ecstasy kicked in," he said.
"It is undisputed that he died as a result of the inhalation of blood. If he hadn't have been battered, there'd be no blood," he said.
Mr Michael McMahon SC, for Mr Willoughby, strongly disputed this in his closing address to the jury, telling them it was their duty to acquit all three if they found that ecstasy had had a role to play in Mr Mulvaney's death.
"If you cannot come to the conclusion that the attack on him caused his death, you must acquit all three," he said.
Describing Mr Willoughby as the "prime mover" in the attack, the prosecution ruled out the suggestion that he was criminally insane and therefore not responsible for his actions.
"It is just nonsense to suggest that this applies in this case," Mr O'Connell said. "It is ridiculous to suggest that Mr Willoughby didn't know right from wrong," he continued.
Counsel for Mr Willoughby called for the jury to find him "guilty but insane" of the murder charge.
If the jury was unable to decide whether or not he was insane at the time, Mr McMahon urged them to find him guilty of manslaughter, for his intent was hindered by his mental capacity.
Mr O'Connell referred to the case against the teenager who cannot be named as "clear-cut". "He agreed expressly to engage in battery without limits," he said.
Defence counsel for Mr Barbour and the third accused will address the jury today before Mr Justice White instructs its members.