Cork mother was under 'duress' when she pleaded guilty to harassing doctor, court told
Marlies Walsh, 50, of Pedlers Cross, Clonakilty, Co Cork pleaded guilty last November to one count of harassment at Temple Street Hospital, Dublin.
A mother has told the Court of Appeal she was under duress and had to prioritise her son's care when she pleaded guilty on the first day of her trial to the "repeated harassment" of a hospital doctor.
In November last year, Marlies Walsh pleaded guilty to harassing the doctor in 2018 and 2019 and was given a fully-suspended two-year sentence.
Walsh, 51, of Pedlers Cross, Clonakilty, Co Cork, pleaded guilty to one count of harassment at Temple Street Hospital, Dublin. She had no previous convictions.
Dublin Circuit Criminal Court heard Walsh contacted the doctor and others at the hospital by phone and email over a period between December 2017 and August 2020 as she wanted to work as a patient advocate. Her son, now 21, was a kidney transplant patient at the hospital.
Judge Elma Sheahan said Walsh had engaged in “repeated harassment” of the doctor and every effort had been made to get Walsh to stop her behaviour before a formal complaint was made to gardaí.
Judge Sheahan imposed a two-year sentence, which she suspended on strict conditions. She also barred Walsh from communicating with the doctor or approaching his residence or place of work for 20 years.
At the sentencing hearing, Garda Eimear Cantwell told Kate Egan BL, prosecuting, that Walsh's son had been a kidney transplant patient at Temple Street Hospital. Walsh had indicated to the team she wished to become involved in advocacy on behalf of patients and families.
The transplant team declined her offer as there was already a full-time team of this nature in place. Her son's care was transferred to Cork but Walsh continued to contact the hospital and doctors. She also made unannounced visits to Temple Street.
The doctor later received a parcel from Walsh, which contained her CV.
Walsh also copied him into emails sent to other hospital staff in which she expressed her desire to take on a patient advocacy role. In April 2018, the hospital asked Walsh not to contact Temple Street, unless it related to her son's care.
In August 14, 2018, the doctor became alarmed after receiving an envelope from Walsh which contained a handmade object tied with a ribbon, post-it notes and five A4 sheets.
One of the pages included a drawing of a stick figure with no legs and a message asking the doctor to ring her.
Another envelope sent by Walsh to the doctor contained three small envelopes labelled 'past', 'present' and 'future' and contained items including Walsh's business card, a spool of golden thread and a note using the question style of 'Who Wants to be a Millionaire?' with Walsh as the 'phone a friend' option.
At the Court of Appeal on Thursday, Walsh, who represented herself, submitted that she had been under duress at the time she entered her guilty plea.
"I never said I didn't make numerous contacts for my son's quality of life and healthcare. It was my duty of care. I felt I had a duty to offer my help. I highlighted that," she told the appeal court.
Walsh said she found not being able to help her own child "very stressful" and said she felt he had met with barriers regarding the "bespoke nature" of his care, which she said needed to be taken into account for him to have optimum help.
The appellant said she felt "stonewalled" and that "sadly, we just had to work around it but it wasn't like he didn't pick up on that. We were without the basics of reassurance, confidence and trust".
Walsh said "there was no fear or threat coming from our end" and claimed hospital staff "overreacted — there was an element of hysteria to it".
Mr Justice John Edwards said he did "not doubt the sincerity that you [Walsh] were trying to raise concerns".
"But at the end of the day, you received cautions from gardaí and cease-and-desist letters from the hospital. You were not complying and the preferment was a charge of harassment. In interviews, you admitted the harassment.
"In the course of the trial you pleaded guilty and made admissions in a situation when you were represented by a solicitor and a barrister," said Mr Justice Edwards.
"I felt I had no choice as to why I pleaded guilty this one time," said Walsh, who added the issue was about the duty of care of the hospital but her legal team sought to frame the case as a "political issue, or a protest issue".
Walsh said she had to come to Dublin for her case and found it a "protracted" process with her legal team while her son was sick at home in Cork.
Walsh said she pleaded guilty after the prosecution's opening speech in order to return home to her son. "The frustration is this could have been avoided," said Walsh.
"You can't plead guilty and then say 'I was frustrated'," said Mr Justice Edwards.
"I was frustrated with the legal expertise in what I thought were instructions that would not be coming across to the court. That was the duress. He was at home. I had to prioritise him. What could I do?" said Walsh.
"The judge asked you if it was the case you wished to plead guilty and you confirmed and you pleaded guilty. You have to show us a legal deficiency. That you regretted the decision is not a basis on which it can be set aside," said Mr Justice Edwards.
Ms Justice Tara Burns said she was "very sorry" to hear of the "dreadful" circumstances around the case but that the criminal matter before the three-judge court related solely to Walsh.
"This was a case about what you had done. My sympathy is with you. Matters had gone to An Garda Síochána and you had been contacted. This is related to your conduct," said Ms Justice Burns.
Walsh said that she had a "reasonable excuse" in grounding the appeal as she was "under duress".
"We have no details of that — only that there was an urgent situation with respect of your son. We simply have no evidence of duress," said Ms Justice Burns.
"The duty of care was not met with. I don't understand what motive I would have for harassment. I have no history of being adversarial. I try to co-operate with people but my son is always my priority," said Walsh.
"It didn't even get to that stage. Your barrister wasn't afforded an opportunity to open their mouth. You collapsed the scrum before it reached that point," said Mr Justice Edwards.
"The trial could have gone ahead. You've articulated the sincerity of the depth of your feelings but you opted not to avail," he added.
Kate Egan BL, for the State, said the claim of duress did not amount to the invalidation of the guilty plea as it was voluntarily entered after legal advice.
"The kernel of the applicant's submissions appears to be that her legal team did not adopt the tone she desired in presenting her case and that she entered a guilty plea because she felt under pressure to be elsewhere and not at trial in Dublin," said Ms Egan in written submissions.
"Respectfully, if the condition of Ms Walsh's son was so deteriorating, this was not drawn to the attention of the court," said counsel.
Ms Egan said: "It was put forward by her counsel that she was under immense stress with respect to the treatment of her son and had been under that stress for some 20 years.
"Respectfully, no prejudice has been identified by the applicant as a result of the way her case was conducted. It is submitted that mere dissatisfaction with the outcome of the case is not grounds for concluding ineffectiveness of counsel.
"There is no submission advanced by the applicant that a plea was entered contrary to her instructions, or that she did not understand the nature of the guilty plea," submitted Ms Egan.
Mr Justice Edwards said the court would reserve its judgement in the appeal.
CONNECT WITH US TODAY
Be the first to know the latest news and updates
