Stardust coroner to hear submissions on 'unlawful killing' option

Family members of the victims of the 1981 Stardust fire disaster at the RDS in Dublin this afternoon. Phoenix Law - which represents the majority of families of the victims - said it would be “unthinkable for a court to exclude a verdict permitted by law before the evidence has been heard”. Picture: Colin Keegan, Collins Dublin

The coroner conducting the Stardust inquests will hear submissions next week on the issue of whether a jury could consider a verdict of unlawful killing into the 48 people who died in the tragedy.

At the 10th pre-inquest hearing which took place at Dublin’s RDS, coroner Dr Myra Cullinane referenced a letter written by the legal representatives of Eamon Butterly.

Mr Butterly ran the Stardust club, in Artane in north Dublin, at the time of the fire at the venue, which struck in the early hours of February 14, 1981. As well as the deaths of 48 - mostly young - people many hundreds were also injured in the blaze.

The inquests, which were first ordered in September 2019, have yet to get fully underway with delays to the process so far.  

Jury difficulties

The latest potential pitfall has come from uncertainties around the empanelling of a jury. 

In criminal cases, a juror’s employer is typically supposed to pay their worker while they serve but no legislation exists for coroner juries. Tánaiste Leo Varadkar told the Dáil last week that the Minister for Justice is considering the “unusual situation given the inquest will go on for so long”.

Dr Cullinane, before coming to the issue of what verdicts the jury could consider, said that she herself had written to the Minister for Justice on the issue of payment for the jury and that she expected a response shortly.

Uncontroversial facts

She also made reference to a document of uncontroversial facts related to the Stardust tragedy, that could be agreed upon by all interested parties in advance of the inquests.

The coroner said: “Mr [Micheál] Ó Scanaill [SC], on behalf of his client Mr Butterly, submitted on the January 18 and in further correspondence on January 24, that it is not possible for them to commit to a position on the uncontroversial facts document and that the inquests should not proceed until a ruling in relation to whether a verdict of unlawful killing is one open to a jury.” 

Unlawful killing is one of a number of findings that can be made at an inquest, which also includes accidental death or an open verdict. 

Dr Cullinane said she had expressed her preliminary view on the matter in a response to Mr Butterly’s representatives. She proposed that the views of the various parties would “be further ventilated” by dealing with legal argument into the matter next Wednesday, February 9.

Commenting on the matter at yesterday’s hearing, Phoenix Law - which represents the majority of families of the victims - said it would be “unthinkable for a court to exclude a verdict permitted by law before the evidence has been heard”.