Judgment
Title: | Kelly -v- Director of Public Prosecutions |
Neutral Citation: | [2007] IESC 69 |
Supreme Court Record Number: | 310/2005 |
High Court Record Number: | 2002 No. 488 JR |
Date of Delivery: | 12/21/2007 |
Court: | Supreme Court |
Composition of Court: | Denham J., Hardiman J., Macken J. |
Judgment by: | Hardiman J. |
Status: | Approved |
Details: | Appeal dismissed |
| Judgments by | Link to Judgment | Concurring | Denham J. | | Macken J. | Hardiman J. | | Macken J. | |
|
THE SUPREME COURT
310/2005
Denham J.
Hardiman J.
Macken J.
BETWEEN:JOHN KELLY
APPLICANT/APPELLANT
AND
THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS
AND
THE JUDGES OF THE CIRCUIT CRIMINAL COURT
RESPONDENTS
JUDGMENT delivered the 21st day of December, 2007, by Mr. Justice Hardiman.
1. I agree with the judgment which has been delivered by Mrs. Justice Denham.
2. In my view, the applicant has not engaged with the facts of this case sufficiently to make out a case that would entitle him to relief. In particular he has failed to adduce evidence to show:
(a) That a person handling the packets covered in cling film in the manner he is alleged to have done would, as a matter of probability, leave a visible fingerprint on them.
(b) That, again as a matter of probability, it was the treatment of the packets by the gardaí or those scientific personnel to whom they gave them, and the effect of such treatment on the cling film, that caused the fingerprints, otherwise probably available, to cease to be visible or available at the time the packaging was eventually examined for fingerprints.
3. In the absence of firm evidence of these points I find it difficult to regard the case advanced by the applicant as anything other than academic, or moot. The onus on the applicant is not a high one and evidence in relation to the fingerprinting of various materials is expert evidence of a sort which is readily available. The applicant would be entitled, if he wishes, to deploy it at his trial. But in its absence he has no case for relief by way of judicial review.
4. I agree with the judgment of Mrs. Justice Denham and the order she proposes.