BREAKING: Two Limerick men found guilty of possession of a firearm with intent to endanger life

Two Limerick men have been convicted by the Special Criminal Court of possessing a firearm with intent to endanger life after their car was stopped by gardai and found to contain a loaded handgun, a petrol canister, latex gloves, clothes and cocaine.

Presiding judge Ms Justice Tara Burns said today it was "inconceivable" that persons who knowingly had possession of a handgun would not know about "its primed status".

The judge further noted that that there was "no possibility whatsoever" that the firearm was not to be used.

John O'Donoghue, 29, with an address at Cliona Park, Moyross, Limerick and Paul Whelan, 25, of Dalgaish Park, also in Moyross, Limerick, had both pleaded not guilty to possession of a 9mm Colt, semi-automatic pistol with intent to endanger life at Park Road, Limerick on July 30, 2018.

Delivering judgment today, Ms Justice Burns, presiding, sitting with Judge Patricia Ryan and Judge Flann Brennan, said that the accused men had also been charged with possession of a firearm and ammunition in suspicious circumstances and they had each pleaded guilty to this charge.

O'Donoghue was the driver of the Alfa Romeo car and Whelan was the front seat passenger at the time, said Ms Justice Burns, adding that a number of items including a handgun were found in the footwell of the front passenger seat. No fingerprints or palm prints were found on the firearm, the court heard.

There were eight rounds of ammunition in the magazine of the pistol and a round in the breach, outlined the judge. Whelan was wearing two hoodies as well as two sets of tracksuit bottoms and three latex gloves were found inside a pocket of his hoodie, she continued.

Ms Justice Burns said the accused men had accepted by virtue of their guilty pleas that they were in possessing of a firearm and ammunition for an unlawful purpose. However, the intention of the accused was what was at issue in this trial, she emphasised, and whether they were in possession of the firearm with intent to endanger life.

"The only matter the court will have regard to is the intent to endanger life and the facts and circumstances of the stopping of the car and what it contained," the judge explained, adding that the non-jury court would not rely on the defendants interviews with gardai where inferences could be drawn from their failure or refusal to account for certain matters.

Ms Justice Burns said the "principal incriminating item" found in the car was the semi-automatic pistol. Evidence was given in the trial that the significance of a round of ammunition being in the breach meant the firearm was ready to be fired, she said, adding that a firearm would not discharge without there being a round in the breach.

The judge said that "the deductions to be drawn" from this act included that the firearm was intended to be fired, the intended firing was to be "immediate and urgent" and had been planned in detail. "It is inconceivable that a person knowingly having possession of this item would not know its primed status," she emphasised. The three-judge court also pointed out that an accelerant was found in the car and O'Donoghue had a lighter on him at the time.

In summary, Ms Justice Burns said that the car was intended to be burnt out after the event, the forensic evidence was to be destroyed and not "brought on" the accused.

The judge said that defence counsel for Whelan had suggested that the "highly suspicious items" could have been in the car for an "alternative or different purpose" such as to carry out a robbery or to hand the car over to another person. "There is no possibility whatsoever that the firearm was not to be used," said Ms Justice Burns, adding that in this event there would be no necessity to have the firearm primed.

"The only irresistible inference" to be drawn from the established facts was that the accused possessed a semi-automatic pistol with an intention to endanger life, she concluded.

The convicted men were remanded in custody until July 29, when they will be sentenced.

Closing the prosecution case last month, Dominic McGinn SC told the court that it was the prosecution'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.

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 was the inescapable conclusion from the circumstances in the case, said Mr McGinn.

Defence counsel Cody Coleman SC, for Whelan, said in his closing speech that there were a number of other possible scenarios which pointed away from the prosecutions contention that the two men had the firearm in their possession with intent to endanger life such as a robbery.

Defence counsel Mark Nicholas SC, for O'Donoghue, argued in his closing speech 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 that 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 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.

Mr Nicholas said it was a "step too far" to infer that the two men had the intent to endanger life.