Law allows assault in self-defence, jury told

The jury in the trial of a garda accused of assaulting three "Reclaim the Streets" protesters in 2002 has been told the law allows assault in self-defence.

Mr Patrick J McCarthy SC, defence counsel, in his closing address for the accused, Garda Donal Corcoran, told the jury it had heard evidence he was acting in defence of a colleague when he struck one of the demonstrators as he has admitted in evidence.

Garda Corcoran, of Mountjoy Garda Station, has pleaded not guilty to three counts of assault causing harm to Oisin Breen, Butterfield Park, Rathfarnham, Katie Crean, New Cabra Road, Dublin 7 and Brian Hayden, Knockmore Grove, Tallaght on May 6, 2002.

Earlier, Mr Sean Gillane BL said, in his closing statement for the prosecution, there were three trials that need to be considered in this case.

He said everyone was in agreement that Mr Hayden was struck by Garda Corcoran but the question was why?

Mr Gillane (with Mr Tom O’Connell SC) said Garda Corcoran claimed it was in defence of a colleague and that Mr Hayden was acting in an aggressive manner towards gardaí.

He suggested that Mr Hayden was plucked from the crowd and struck from behind and deliberately so.

"Mr Hayden did not even so much as lay an eyeball on the garda who struck him," he said.

Mr Gillane said Ms Crean’s honesty was immediately obvious and had not overemphasised her situation, stating she was not in need of medical attention as a result of receiving a baton blow.

She was looking behind her and she saw who struck her. Mr Gillane said everyone was in agreement Ms Crean had been struck but the question was by who?

Mr Gillane described Mr Breen as a "colourful witness". He said Mr Breen had admitted that other gardaí hit him but he remembered Garda Corcoran as hitting him as he was the one who hit the first blow.

Counsel said the question in relation to Mr Breen again was who hit him and indeed where they hit him?

Mr Gilliane advised the jury not to decide the case on the basis of prejudice or sympathy they might have for either protesters or gardaí. They should leave all sentiments outside the door.

Mr McCarthy urged the jury to consider the law of assault which he said allowed for assault when it occurred because of self-defence.

He said there was evidence showing that Garda Corcoran was acting in defence of a colleague when he struck Mr Hayden. He advised the jury it must decide if there was a reasonable possibility that in Garda Corcoran’s state of mind at the time his actions were justifiable.

He told the jury they should put themselves "in the mind of the alleged assailant" to determine if Garda Corcoran was right in doing what he did.

He agreed with Mr Gilliane that Ms Crean presented as an open, honest and candid witness but he warned the jury to consider she was mistaken in her identity of Garda Corcoran as her assailant.

Mr McCarthy said there was a serious state of confusion at the time and his client was one of 20 gardaí who were in the line directly behind her.

Mr McCarthy said Mr Breen gave a "welter of conflicting evidence" and he asked the jury to consider it did not surmount to a sufficient level to convict his client on this count.

He also said that there was a weakness in Mr Breen’s identification and that his evidence in court contradicted that given in his statement.

Mr McCarthy concluded that Garda Corcoran did not have a high level of experience and was relatively junior. He further said that his client was not prepared for his duties that day and because of a lack of management on the day was thrown into the situation.

The trial continues before Judge Yvonne Murphy.