Key witness claims gardaí assaulted him

A key witness in the State’s case against Martin Conmey for the killing of a teenager almost 40 years ago claims he was assaulted and interrogated by investigating gardaí who “put words” in his mouth.

A sworn statement taken from 62-year-old Co Meath man Sean Reilly, concerning what he said he saw on the evening Una Lynskey vanished, was considered “a keystone” for the 1971 conviction of Mr Conmey for manslaughter.

Today, Mr Reilly told the Court of Criminal Appeal, he was "punched" and “prodded” by several gardaí, and was made “to feel” as though he was a suspect in the teen’s disappearance.

He was testifying before the three-judge appeal court on the second day of the hearing of an application taken by Martin Conmey as part of his attempt to have his manslaughter conviction declared a miscarriage of justice.

The now 59-year-old, of Porterstown Lane, Rataoth claims “newly discovered facts” will prove he was not responsible for the death of Ms Lynskey in 1971.

Her body was discovered on December 10, 1971 in a ditch in a remote part of the Dublin Mountains, two months after she vanished while returning to her family home after work.

A post mortem examination failed to establish how the young civil servant died.

Lawyers for Mr Conmey are claiming that “newly discovered” facts in the case include the existence of “earlier” contradictory statements from key witnesses and a previously unknown allegation of violence and “oppression” by investigating gardaí against one of these, Mr Sean Reilly.

In 1972, Martin Conmey and another man, Dick Donnelly, were convicted of the 19-year-old’s manslaughter. A year later, both men appealed and Mr Donnelly’s conviction was overturned, but Martin Conmey served three years in prison for the offence.

A third man, Martin Kerrigan, was also suspected of having been involved in the crime, but he was abducted and killed a short time after Ms Lynskey’s body was discovered.

Mr Reilly told the CCA of Mr Justice Adrian Hardiman presiding, sitting with Mr Justice Declan Budd and Mr Justice Eamon De Valera that in late October of 1971 he gave two statements to investigating gardaí in connection with the case.

In the first statement taken October 20th 1971, Mr Reilly, who was 23 at the time, told Gardai that a car “would have passed” while he was outside his family home on the evening the teen disappeared on Porterstown Lane.

He said, at the time it passed, he was sitting in the car of Martin Madden, another “crucial witness” in the original case. The car was "going down towards" the Dublin to Navan Road.

Mr Reilly told the court yesterday, it “was dark” he heard it go by and so it would have been “ impossible” to make out who was driving it. He said Mr Madden’s car, in which he was sitting, was parked “way in off the road” and that its rear was facing the lane.

The court heard that four days later on Oct 24, a second statement was taken from Mr Reilly in which he said Martin Madden’s car “had a good view” of Porterstown Lane, that he “was sure” Dick Donnelly was driving it and “almost sure” Martin Kerrigan was in it too.

Today Mr Reilly said he made this statement “under interrogation” and that Gardai “put words” in his “mouth”.

Mr Reilly said on the day that statement was taken, gardaí arrived to the building site where he worked and asked that he travel with them to Porterstown Lane.

Instead he said he was brought to Trim garda station where he questioned for “seven hours”. When he was finally allowed to leave, he said he was “glad to get out” and “had had enough of it”.

He alleges he was punched several times in the shoulder by gardaí who swore at him and told him “to speak up and tell the truth”.

He said one garda was “frothing at the mouth with temper”. He said they wanted “information about Dick Donnelly’s car”, and that he told them the car that passed “could” have been his but that he was not in a position to “swear this”.

Mr Reilly said he “had no recollection” of having given sworn evidence in relation to the controversial second statement at Trim District Court in advance of the Mr Conmey’s trial.

He told Mr Michael O’Higgins, for Martin Conmey, that he had “no reason” to lie about what had happened and “hadn’t taken sides with anyone” in respect of the case.

The court also heard testimony yesterday from Maire Teahan, a now retired solicitor who helped represent Mr Conmey at his 1971 trial.

She described as “very tense time, the time subsequent to Ms Lynskey’s disappearance in October of that year.

The discovery of her body two months later and the abduction of Mr Martin Kerrigan “spilt apart” the town lands of Dunshaughlin and Ratoath Ms Teahan told counsel for the State, Ms Pauline Walley SC, that many of the area’s families had been “transplanted” into the area from Mayo.

The former solicitor agreed with counsel for the State that a “two-pronged approach” was taken to Mr Conmey's case, based on the unreliability of crucial state witnesses in the case and the manner by which statements were obtained by Conmey himself.

She told the court that she had “no recollection of ever having seen” or being “furnished with” a series of earlier statements made by State key witnesses in the case.

If defence lawyers were aware of their existence and had seen them, she said “then there contents would have been taken into account”.

She also said Mr Conmey “did go see” a doctor “about a week” after his release from Garda questioning in October 1971, concerning injuries he alleges he suffered.

Mr Christopher Ennis told the hearing today that he heard “his friends getting bet” at Trim garda station while he, Mr Martin Conmey and two other men were being questioned in late October of 1971.

He told Mr Brendan Grehan SC, for the State, that he was “100% certain” he heard “screams and crying” coming fm Martin Conmey and Martin Kerrigan but “could not be sure” in relation to Dick Donnelly.

Mr Ennis said the gardaí were trying to “frighten” him into telling them “what they wanted to hear”.

The hearing was expected to “three, possibly four days” but Judge Hardiman indicated at the end of the day’s proceedings yesterday that the case “may take a further four days”.