LINDA MULHALL, one of two sisters jailed for her part in the killing of their mother's boyfriend, has lost her court bid to reduce the severity of her 15-year sentence.
In rejecting Mulhall's appeal yesterday, the Court of Criminal Appeal (CCA) found the trial judge, Mr Justice Paul Carney, had imposed the appropriate sentence.
Mulhall (33) was found guilty in October 2006 of the manslaughter of her mother's boyfriend, Farah Swaleh Noor (39), a Somalian, on March 20th, 2005.
Her sister Charlotte (27) recently lost an appeal against a life sentence imposed for the murder of Noor, who was killed during a row after a night of drinking and drug taking in a Dublin flat. His body was cut up and dumped in a canal while his head was buried in a field in Tallaght and never found.
The sisters' mother Kathleen (52) is awaiting trial on charges in connection with Noor's death.
In February the CCA adjourned its decision on Linda Mulhall's appeal against severity of sentence so it could consider reports by probation officer Scarlett Taylor and consultant forensic psychiatrist Dr Helen O'Neill of the Central Mental Hospital.
Dr O'Neill's report had been prepared just before the sentencing hearing in December 2006 while Ms Taylor's report, prepared in March last, was based on a predecessor's detailed notes who had interviewed Mulhall several times.
Mulhall's lawyer, Brendan Grehan SC, said the psychiatric report showed his client felt great remorse to such a degree that she had difficulty touching her own children. It showed she had a very brutalised existence from a very early age and took to drink and self-harm as a means of dealing with it.
The probation report showed she was tearful and distressed and had great difficulty understanding what she had done because she had never done anything like this before. Because of this one event in her life, she "should not be written off". While she could not explain what she did, she had never tried to deflect blame for it.
Ms Justice Fidelma Macken, sitting with Mr Justice Roderick Murphy and Mr Justice Eamon de Valera, said that, having considered the reports, the court was satisfied the sentence should stand.
The court had considered the submissions by Mulhall's lawyer and it noted the psychiatrist recommended that Mulhall required a structured programme of counselling and rehabilitation to deal with the risk of re-offending.
There was no doubt the sentence imposed was lengthy and the trial judge had decided, because of the gruesome nature of the offence, sentence should be at the "very very serious end of the scale", Ms Justice Macken said.
The maximum sentence for manslaughter was life imprisonment and Mr Justice Carney considered the appropriate sentence was in the "late teens or perhaps 20 or 21 years". In reducing that to 15, he took into account that Mulhall co-operated with gardaí, at least after the initial investigation; had assisted in recovering parts of the body; and her lack of previous convictions.
While the defence had argued the trial judge should distinguish between the killing and subsequent events, the CCA was satisfied he was correct in principle when he found this was part and parcel of what led him to describe the case as one of the most difficult and grim he had faced. The CCA was therefore satisfied the sentence reflected no failure to comply with sentencing rules.
On whether part of the 15 years should be suspended, Ms Justice Macken said it was clear from early on that Mulhall had to engage with counselling and rehabilitation services but she had not done so by the time of sentencing.
Long after arrest and incarceration she had not joined any programme despite the probation services saying she was at risk of re-offending. In those circumstances, the trial judge had not erred in failing to suspend part of the sentence, the judge said.
Mulhall, whose hair covered her face while the judge gave her decision, was quickly brought out of court after the ruling.
Last February, the CCA ruled it was legally improper and inappropriate for sentence to have been passed without the relevant reports and it adjourned its decision on whether the sentence was lenient to allow it consider them.