Mother not entitled to State-funded counsel at inquest into son's death

THE SUPREME Court has ruled that the mother of a young man who died in hospital after being found unconscious in a Garda cell…

THE SUPREME Court has ruled that the mother of a young man who died in hospital after being found unconscious in a Garda cell is not entitled to have the State fund legal representation for her at the inquest into her son’s death.

Teresa McGee claims serious questions arise concerning her son Paul’s death in December 2002, including whether the State or its agents were responsible through gross negligence.

The case was before the three-judge Supreme Court via an appeal by the State against a High Court decision that Ms McGee was entitled to have the State fund legal representation for her at the inquest into her son’s death.

Mr Justice Joseph Finnegan noted that Paul McGee died on December 26th, 2002, when he was 19. He had been arrested for public order offences and was displaying signs suggestive of paranoid delusions, the judge said.

READ MORE

Mr McGee was taken to Kilmainham Garda station where he was handcuffed and placed in a cell but, shortly afterwards, he was found unconscious. He was taken to St James’s Hospital where he was pronounced dead.

Assistant State Pathologist Dr Marie Cassidy carried out a postmortem the next day and concluded that the death was consistent with cocaine-related collapse.

In her High Court proceedings, Ms McGee said there were serious questions arising from her son’s death, including issues concerning his treatment in custody and the speed with which medical intervention was sought for him.

An inquest scheduled to open in 2004 was adjourned after Ms McGee took a High Court challenge after being told there was no publicly funded provision for legal aid for an inquest. The High Court ruled that fair procedures required that Ms McGee be provided with legal aid and directed the State to fund such legal representation.

Granting the State’s appeal yesterday against that finding, Mr Justice Finnegan said the relevant law was clear and the right to legal representation did not carry with it a right to State-funded legal aid.

While there was a constitutional right to State-funded legal aid when facing a criminal charge with serious consequences, that right had not been extended to non-criminal proceedings, he said.