Jury finds man not guilty of manslaughter in Cork

The jury of four women and eight men took little more than one hour to deliver their unanimous verdict

Adrian Henry (pictured) had denied the charge of committing the manslaughter of James Duncan in Cork on September 12, 2019. Photo: Cork Courts Limited

A not guilty verdict has been delivered in the case against a 49–year-old man accused of the manslaughter of a 40-year-old man when they were attending a homeless charity called the street café in Cork city centre in September 2019.

A jury of four women and eight men took little more than one hour to deliver their unanimous verdict in the case.

Adrian Henry of Seminary Road, Blackpool, Cork, denied the charge of committing the manslaughter of James Duncan, 40, at St. Patrick’s Street in Cork on September 12, 2019, at Cork Circuit Criminal Court.

The late James Duncan was from Dunmore Gardens, Knocknaheeny in Cork. Members of his family attended Courtroom 4 where the trial commenced on Monday of last week. They sat quietly at the back of the court again today as the unanimous not guilty verdict was delivered.

Judge Helen Boyle said to the jury: “I thank you very much for the diligence with which you have performed your duty.” The judge’s last interaction with the jury today was a further clarification of the legal definition of manslaughter.

The judge explained that to bring back a verdict of guilty they would have to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt on three distinct elements of the offence: firstly, that an assault was committed by the defendant on Mr Duncan; secondly, that this caused the death of the deceased; and thirdly, that the assault was done with the intention of causing some physical injury that was not merely of a trivial or negligible character, but not necessarily a serious injury.

Unlike deliberating on a murder trial where a jury may deliver a verdict of not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter, there was no such alternative available to the jury deliberating on this manslaughter trial. Judge Boyle told them they had only two verdicts available to them, namely guilty or not guilty of manslaughter.

Voice of the deceased

Unusually, in a trial of its kind the jury heard the voice of the deceased as part of the evidence.  The 999 call from the late James Duncan, made at 9.15pm on September 12, 2019, was played to the jury: “I am outside the Modern. Just outside Ulster Bank, close to the Modern… in Cork city. I am after being attacked. (Asked who attacked him) A fella. He is still here. He beat the f*** out of me. I need help.” 

He gave his name as James Duncan and said: “No I don’t need an ambulance but I need help… Thank you. Thank you.” Defence senior counsel, Tom Creed, said the deceased had what he categorised as “almost time-bomb vulnerabilities.” He reminded the jury of the “extraordinary situation that someone without a mark on him” died as a result of whatever happened to him.

“The prosecution – in the guise of inference – is asking you to speculate. They are asking you to infer or speculate that he banged his head in the first incident… But I say the prosecution did not prove a particular head strike. 

"It would be speculation to say he struck his head the first time (when pushed to the ground) rather than the second time (when he slid down the side of a parked car he was leaning against) or both.

“We can infer he struck his head but to go further is to speculate. It would be conjecture that he must have struck his head on the first occasion… If two versions are reasonably open to you on the evidence then you must adopt the version most favourable to the accused.

“If you follow what the prosecution says to you we could be looking at a major miscarriage of justice. If the subdural haematoma was caused by the second fall – not the first – then it is not caused by any action on the part of Mr Henry. It is not caused by an assault,” Mr Creed said.

Pathologist testimony

Dr Beng Ong, the pathologist who carried out the post-mortem examination on the deceased, told the jury: “I was informed that the deceased had died after about six weeks in hospital. I was shown CCTV footage of the scene which I was told was a soup kitchen. I was shown an image of what appears to be the deceased being dragged by the alleged perpetrator into an area not viewed further by the CCTV.

“After that, he was observed to be conscious. I was then shown other footage where I was told it was roughly half an hour later from the first incident. I observed him to be leaning on a car. His head was observed falling backwards against the rear windscreen. His legs appeared to buckle. 

"He slid down onto the ground. I could not see how he ended on the ground and if his head has impacted on the ground.” Cross-examined by defence senior counsel, Tom Creed, the pathologist agreed that there were no external signs to show evidence of any assault on his head or body.