A CRIMINAL who claimed his trial was aborted as a consequence of "skulduggery" in 1992 was told by a High Court judge yesterday he had a strong case to be paid his legal costs of that trial by the State.
Following a new trial, Christopher Duane, with an address at Neilstown Park, Clondalkin, Co Dublin, is serving a 10 year prison sentence for falsely imprisoning Rocco and Sharon Cafolla on December 14th/15th, 1988. He was also convicted of the thefts of £85,000.
Mr Justice Geoghegan said he had before him a certified copy of the order by Judge Dominic Lynch of the Circuit Court which stated "defence application for costs in respect of the first trial in January 1992 was refused".
Dunne maintained that that order was wrong and that Judge Lynch had refused to entertain the application for costs.
Mr Justice Geoghegan said the transcript relating to his sentencing in February 1992, following a second trial, appeared to bear out Dunne's contention.
On the other hand Det Garda Sgt Patrick Brady had sworn that costs of the abortive trial were refused when Dunne was being sentenced.
Mr Justice Geoghegan said that in the absence of the order quashing or amending Judge Lynch's order he had to assume it was correct and he was reinforced in this view by the statement of Sgt Brady.
But in case he was wrong and the matter went to another court, he thought Dunne would have had quite a strong case for being awarded his costs of the abortive trial.
The circumstances in which the trial was aborted were that senior counsel for the Director of Public Prosecutions had assured senior counsel for Dunne that a particular witness, who was in the nature of an accomplice, would not be called. The defence was prepared on that assumption.
However, subsequently it was indicated the witness was being called, and despite protests the judge insisted the trial should proceed. It was temporarily adjourned to enable an application for prohibition to be made to the High Court. This was granted and the Supreme Court upheld that view and ordered a new trial.
The Supreme Court held that, although the defence was prejudiced, no blame was to be attached to anybody. It had originally been thought the particular witness would not travel and it emerged later he was willing to do so. It was wrong of Dunne to give the impression that the trial was aborted as a consequence of "skulduggery" by the State's counsel.
Mr Justice Geoghegan said that as the State unwittingly misled the defence with the consequent aborting of the trial Dunne would have a stateable case for being awarded his costs. The proper forum to air this matter was in an appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal.