Judgment reserved following trial of Limerick men accused of having loaded pistol in car

It is a "step too far" to infer that two Limerick men accused of possessing a firearm had the intent to endanger life, a defence barrister has told the Special Criminal Court. 

The three-judge court also heard that the case against the two accused men did not "hang together quite like a West End production". 

Evidence has previously been given that the two men were stopped by gardai in an Alfa Romeo car which was found to contain a loaded handgun, two petrol canisters - one of which contained petrol - a pair of latex gloves, clothing and cocaine.

The non-jury court has also heard evidence that Paul Whelan, 25, was wearing a "double set of clothing", while three latex gloves were found inside a pocket of his hoodie.

John O'Donoghue, 29, with an address at Cliona Park, Moyross and Mr Whelan of Dalgaish Park, also in Moyross have pleaded not guilty to possession of a 9mm Colt, semi-automatic pistol with intent to endanger life at Park Road, Corbally on July 30, 2018.

Defence counsel Mark Nicholas SC, for Mr O'Donoghue, argued in his closing speech this Wednesday morning that the prosecution had to establish his client's state of mind on the night, namely that there was an intent to endanger life.

The barrister said this was a "high bar" to meet and all the prosecution had was a "set of circumstances" but nothing to show intent. 

Mr Nicholas submitted the only way the court could find his client guilty was if the inference posed by the prosecution was "the only possible inference". The prosecution case had not been made out if there were other "potential unlawful possibilities" such as having a gun in their possession in order to shoot at an empty house, he said. 

While the circumstances of this case are undoubtedly "highly suspicious", not all criminal possession of guns give rise to intent under Section 15a of the Firearms Act, he remarked, adding that no voice recordings had been captured under surveillance in this case. 

He said the case against the two accused men did not "hang together quite like a West End production". 

In summary, Mr Nicholas submitted that the prosecution must have proven the requisite intent to endanger life under Section 15a as being "the only unambiguous inference" because if there were "lesser possibilities" then these would have to be discounted. 

He asked the three-judge panel to be "very careful" when coming to a verdict in this case and emphasised that he did not think that the "only irresistible inference" was an intent to endanger life. 

Finally, Mr Nicholas said it was a "step too far" to infer that the two men accused of possessing a firearm had the intent to endanger life. 

Ms Justice Tara Burns, presiding, sitting with Judge Patricia Ryan and Judge Flann Brennan, remanded both men in custody until July 5, when the court will deliver judgment on the case.

Closing the prosecution case on Tuesday, Dominic McGinn SC told the court that it was the State's contention that a "serious incident" was to happen on the evening of July 30 and this was evident from the "serious precautions" taken by the two men and the items found in their car.  

The barrister said that both men were "forensically aware" from the items found in the car which included several sets of gloves and a change of clothes. They had taken precautions that there would not be traces left on anything and no "usable fingerprints" were found on the gun, he said. 

Mr McGinn argued that an inference could be drawn that there was a plan to burn out the Alfa Romeo from the petrol canister found in the footwell of the car. There was an anticipation that any evidence had to be destroyed. He said the court could draw its own conclusion from the cocaine found in the car. 

The most important factor in the case was the way in which the firearm was loaded, said Mr McGinn. "Not only were there eight rounds of ammunition in the magazine, the firearm was cocked and there was a round in the breach," he emphasised, adding that it was ready to be fired. 

The lawyer said that an inference can be drawn that the firearm was going to be fired by one of the occupants in the car. The firearm was not intended to be used as a threat, it was in order to injure someone and that is the inescapable conclusion from the circumstances in the case, said Mr McGinn.