Gemma O'Doherty drops appeal against conviction for public order offences

Gemma O'Doherty (pictured) had received a two-month suspended sentence and a fine of €750 for the public order offences. File picture

Gemma O’Doherty has withdrawn her appeal against a conviction for public order offences.

At a hearing at the Circuit Court in Bray, Co. Wicklow, this morning her solicitor Brendan Moloney told the court that his client was withdrawing her appeal. During a previous hearing in July, Mr Justice Patrick Quinn had said he would keep the whole day free on Monday, October 17, to hear Ms O’Doherty’s appeal.

Last September, she was convicted at Bray District Court of threatening and abusive behaviour, refusing to give her name and address to a garda, and resisting arrest, all on a footbridge at the N11. She received a two-month suspended sentence and a fine of €750 for the public order offences which occurred in Kilmacanogue in Wicklow on August 28, 2020.

Garda Andrew Sullivan had told the court that, during the incident, he and colleagues were told they were “traitors to the Irish public”, “complicit with cover-up of paedophilia” and “complicit in the cover-up of murder”.

He said the defendant refused to give her name and address. Signs on the bridge at the centre of the incident read “masks spread virus”, and “no forced vaccines”. “We remained calm throughout,” Garda Sullivan said. “They had a right to protest — that wasn’t disputed. I expressed concern for the motorists below.” 

On that occasion, the court heard from Mr Moloney, who said the incident occurred against the backdrop of a campaign in which his client was deeply invested. The judge said that it was a clear and intentional breach of the peace.

Following the sentence, Ms O’Doherty indicated she would lodge an appeal against the conviction. She was not present in court for today’s brief hearing, where her solicitor indicated the appeal had been withdrawn.

The court also heard today that a number of banners taken by gardaí during the incident had been subject to a forfeiture order which would remain in place.

Earlier this year, in an unrelated case, the Supreme Court upheld a decision to dismiss Ms O’Doherty and John Waters' challenge to the constitutionality of laws introduced in response to the Covid-19 pandemic.

This ruling brought to an end a controversial legal action before the Irish courts that commenced shortly after the State introduced various regulations, restrictions, and measures in response to the Covid-19 pandemic over two years ago.

Ms O'Doherty and Mr Waters' appeal was against a decision by the High Court, later upheld by the Court of Appeal (CoA), not to grant them permission to bring their action against the measures on the basis it was “misconceived and entirely without merit”.

The Supreme Court later ruled that the pair did not have to pay legal fees incurred by the State for defending their failed challenge against the pandemic-related laws.