Man cleared of murdering grandmother

A judge directed a jury to find one of two men accused of murdering a 65-year-old grandmother not guilty due to insufficient evidence against the accused, at the Central Criminal Court today.

Man cleared of murdering grandmother

A judge directed a jury to find one of two men accused of murdering a 65-year-old grandmother not guilty due to insufficient evidence against the accused, at the Central Criminal Court 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.

Mr Justice Paul Carney told the jury of six men and six women that defence counsel had made submissions relating to the evidence heard in the case.

“I have ruled that there was insufficient evidence for the case to proceed against Conor Grogan,” Mr Justice Carney said.

He directed the jury to find Grogan not guilty of murder.

Grogan’s counsel, Mr Brendan Grehan SC, asked that his client be discharged, to which Mr Justice Carney agreed.

Mr Justice Carney ruled that the case against Grogan’s co-accused, Rattigan, will proceed.

The court also heard closing speeches from prosecution and defence in relation to the case against Rattigan.

“This is a case which consists mostly of circumstantial evidence,” Mr Edward Comyn SC told to the court.

“Nobody was there when the two men discharged the shotgun through Mrs Casey’s door and there were no witnesses who could identify who the two men were,” he said.

Mr Comyn told the jury that the evidence by State Pathologist Dr Marie Cassidy that Mrs Casey’s death was due to the shotgun injury was unchallenged by defence.

“She was a normal, healthy woman and her death was clearly caused by the discharging of the shotgun,” he said.

The jury were told they could not ignore the evidence of the dead woman’s brother, Mr Frank Oakley, who was staying at her house when she was killed.

“When these two men were running up the stairs he heard reference to her being called a ‘bitch’ and that they were out to get her,” Mr Comyn said.

“These two men came after her with a shotgun and had serious intent to kill or cause serious harm,” he added.

Mr Comyn told the jury the two men were part of a joint enterprise. “One wasn’t just in it for a morning walk,” he said.

A neighbour, Mr Colm O’Brien, woke up around 6am to shouting, a smashing noise and two loud bangs. He told the court he saw two men at Mrs Casey’s gate, slowly walking past his house, Mr Comyn said.

One of the men was carrying a shotgun. According to evidence from forensic scientist Mr Annette Forde, the shotgun had fresh scratches on it, which contained glass powder matched to the two types of glass that were smashed through the victim’s front door.

“The place where the gun was found was part of the premises where the sister of the accused, Tina Rattigan, lived,” Mr Comyn said.

A fingerprint found on the barrel of the gun was matched to the accused.

“It conclusively represents a link between the gun and the accused, Timothy Rattigan,” Mr Comyn said.

“You may conclude that after the killing of Mrs Casey, that gun was wiped down,” he added.

He asked the jury to find Rattigan “guilty of the murder of Mrs Joan Casey at 6am on April 3”.

Mr Anthony Sammon SC, defending, told the jury to “be very, very careful not to seek to indulge yourself or engage in any form of speculation”.

He said the prosecution case against his client was “entirely circumstantial”.

The court heard there was no motive in the case, although Mr Sammon said prosecution suggested at the opening of the trial that perhaps Mrs Casey was not the intended target.

“That seemed to have been abandoned in Mr Comyn’s closing and quite rightly so,” he said.

He told the jury there was “clear evidence” from Mr Stephen Johnson, a friend of the accused, that Rattigan was at his sister’s flat for the duration of the crime.

“Whoever” shot Mrs Casey through the door was “totally reckless and careless”.

“But you don’t actually have the intention to kill or cause serious harm in legal terms,” he said.

He told the jury the fingerprint evidence is an “invitation to speculation”.

“This fingerprint could have been put there three months previous,” he said.

“What does emerge from that is that Mr Rattigan is in such a way of life that he has had contact with shotguns,” Mr Sammon said.

The jury is expected to begin deliberating a verdict tomorrow.

More in this section

Lunchtime News

Newsletter

Get a lunch briefing straight to your inbox at noon daily. Also be the first to know with our occasional Breaking News emails.

Cookie Policy Privacy Policy Brand Safety FAQ Help Contact Us Terms and Conditions

© Examiner Echo Group Limited