Forensic scientist gives evidence in murder trial

A forensic scientist told the trial of two Dublin men accused of murdering a 65-year-old grandmother that there was “strong support” that the runners of one of the accused had been in contact with the victim’s door and “slight support” that the runners of the other accused had been at the scene, the Central Criminal Court heard today.

Conor Grogan (aged 26), of Avonbeg Park, Tallaght, Dublin, and Timothy Rattigan (aged 26), of St Dominick’s Terrace, Tallaght, Dublin, have pleaded not guilty to the murder of Mrs Joan Casey (aged 65) at Avonbeg Park on April 3, 2004.

Ms Annette Forde of the Forensic Science Laboratory conducted examinations of a number of items taken from the deceased’s home, the homes of the two accused and from the vicinity of the scene to either connect or eliminate them from the investigation.

She told the court of a non-mathematical scale, which gives an indication of the strength of the evidence.

Ms Forde noticed fresh scratches on the barrel of a shotgun, which was in a bag along with cartridges and a pistol near the dead woman’s home.

“They indicate forceful contact between the barrel and the glass,” Ms Forde said.

She matched glass powder on the shotgun to the two types of glass taken from the broken panel on Mrs Casey’s porch door and inner front door.

This indicated “strong support” that the shotgun was used to break the window panels on the door.

Five out of 12 fragments of glass examined on the runners of the accused, Grogan, matched glass from the porch door and one fragment matched the inner front door, the court heard.

In Ms Forde’s judgment, there was “slight support” to the proposition that Grogan’s runners had been in contact with the scene at Mrs Casey’s home.

A footwear impression on the deceased’s bedroom door was also examined against the runners of the two accused.

“There is strong support that the runners of Timothy Rattigan were in contact with the door,” she said.

Cross-examined by Grogan’s counsel, Mr Brendan Grehan SC, Ms Forde said she “could not exclude the possibility” that Grogan’s runners had made the footwear impression.

“The opinion I formed is that Timothy Rattigan’s runners were slightly better size-wise to the impression,” Mr Forde said.

She admitted that “slight support” is only one mark up from “no support” on the evidence scale.

Ms Forde agreed that the presence of up to eight different glass fragments on Grogan’s runners may have come from his work as a window glazer.

Cross-examined by Mr Anthony Sammon SC, for Rattigan, Ms Forde admitted she “could not exactly” say what sized shoes made the footwear impression on the door.

Rattigan’s runners were not examined for glass fragments due to the lapse in time between the incident and when his runners were taken as evidence.

The trial continues tomorrow before Mr Justice Paul Carney.