Nevin begins appeal against murder conviction
The hearing of an application by Catherine Nevin as part of her attempt to have her murder conviction declared a miscarriage of justice resumed before the Court of Criminal Appeal today.
Lawyers for Nevin want access to documents which they claim are highly relevant to their client’s application, including Garda security files on three men who gave evidence against the 58-year-old at her trial almost 10 years ago, and material related to the Dublin and Monaghan bombings in 1974.
Nevin alleges the documents will assist her in undermining the credibility of the three men.
Today lawyers for the State failed to prevent the application from being heard, on the basis that Nevin’s case had no merit, even “at its height”.
The CCA ruled it was not satisfied her application case was “so unstateable”, it warranted dismissal at “this stage” but added that its decision to allow the matter proceed was “not to say” it had any “merit or substance” to it.
In April 2000, Nevin was convicted of murdering her husband Tom at their pub, Jack White’s Inn, Brittas Bay on March 19, 1996.
Nevin was also convicted of soliciting Gerry Heapes, William McClean and John Jones, to kill her husband.
She is serving a life sentence on the murder charge and a concurrent seven-year term on the soliciting charges. Her appeal against conviction was dismissed in 2003.
The convicted murderer was in court today before Mr Justice Adrian Hardiman presiding, sitting with Mr Justice Liam McKechnie and Mr Justice George Birmingham.
Nevin is also seeking an order requiring the DPP to answer whether Mr McClean, Mr Heapes and Mr Jones were ever State informers and whether Mr McClean, with whom Nevin denied having an affair, had paramilitary connections.
At the resumption of the hearing yesterday, following its adjournment in April last, Mr Tom O’Connell argued it needed to be shown that material requested amounted to “newly discovered fact”, “credible and relevant” and which “might” have had a “material difference” to the case's outcome.
Counsel for Nevin contend that information contained in a newspaper article published in 2008 showing what purported to be a “Suspect Antecedent Form”, a type Garda security file, lists William McClean’s associates as members of illegal and paramilitary organisations, including the INLA and Provisional IRA.
This information was not available to Ms Nevin’s defence at trial.
Yesterday the court heard that Mr McClean “emphatically” denied links with any paramilitary organisations during the trial.
Lawyers for the State argued that even if a document was capable of undermining Mr McClean’s credibility, it was “not relevant” to the safety of Nevin’s conviction.
In order to find Nevin guilty of murder, the jury was first required to convict her on a solicitation charge. The jury returned guilty verdicts in respect of all three solicitation charges, including that which concerned William McClean.
However, Mr Hugh Hartnett SC, for Nevin, argued that the issue of Mr McClean’s credibility did not concern just the solicitation charge which involved him.
He said that the entire case against his client “depended almost entirely on three men” and without them there would no murder conviction. Mr Hartnett SC said if one was “tainted”, it followed that all three could be considered were tainted.
He added that if one was shown to be lacking in credibility than the close connectivity of the other could have caused “the case to tumble”.
The court heard it was “unrealistic” to say there were two independent witnesses outside of Mr McClean, given the nature of the relationship between Mr Jones and Mr Heapes who were both members of the same local Sinn Féin branch.
Nevin’s legal team is also seeking depositions in the Barron report of the inquiry into the Dublin Monaghan bombings which they claim identifies Mr McClean as having stayed in the Four Courts Hotel between the 10th of May and the 16th, 1974, and as being the person who made phone calls and sent telegrams to Belfast and London.
This same man, the inquiry report says, “turned up” as a witness in a Nevin murder trial in 2000.
Correspondence between former Chief Justice Hamilton in the Independent Commission of Inquiry into the bombings to a legal representative refers to confidential information which lists amongst others “Wilkinson McClean”. Nevin lawyers say this is William McClean.
Yesterday counsel for the State argued that Gardaí “do not know who Wilkinson is, was or if he ever existed”. Mr O’Connell SC said: “Barron does not put the matter any further, nor do the depositions”.
Paddy MacEntee SC, who compiled a report in 2007 on the 1974 bombings, was unable, for legal reasons, to publish findings.
However, after the former Taoiseach Bertie Ahern told the Dáil that the Government had asked agencies in Ireland and the UK to withdraw claims of privilege, information was ultimately provided to the DPP and Garda material relevant to whether Mr McClean had paramilitary connection was now in the possession of the parties.
The court heard how the “major impetus” of the investigation into the bombing had “died down” by the end of 1974.
The court was also told Philip Tobin had sworn an affidavit saying that he was asked to provide Brian Capper, an associate of Mr Heapes with an alibi on the night Tom Nevin was murdered.
Mr Tobin said that he was unable to do so because he had already told gardaí that Mr Capper was not with him that night.
Yesterday, the court ruled that a letter and an appended document over which privilege was being claimed by Detective Superintendent Peter Kirwan had “no significance” to case being put forward by Nevin’s lawyers.
The three-judge appeal court requested a list of what material was made available to the trial judge and the appeal court, which it said “would advance matters”.
The hearing continues tomorrow.
