'Medieval violence' - Jury finds six men guilty of murdering dad-of-7 in Kerry honour killing

After five days of jury deliberations, all six defendants who were accused of taking part in a "macabre provincial tragedy" by "butchering" father of seven Thomas 'Tom' Dooley in "an honour killing" during a Co Kerry funeral have now been convicted of his murder, which the State said had been carried out with "appalling, medieval violence". 

The Central Criminal Court jury today (Thursday July 25) convicted the victim's cousin Daniel Dooley (42) of An Carraigin, Connolly Park, Tralee, Co Kerry of murder at Rath Cemetery, Rathass, Tralee, Co Kerry on October 5, 2022 by a majority verdict of 11-1. 

Daniel Dooley, who was the final defendant to be dealt with in the case, had pleaded not guilty to the murder charge. Daniel Dooley protested his innocence when the jury left the courtroom this afternoon. 

He said aloud: "On my wife's grave I am an innocent man... you are sending a widow man to jail." 

The ten men and two women of the jury accepted the prosecution case that the six defendants had taken part in the joint enterprise to murder 42-year-old Thomas Dooley.

Two days ago, another of the victim's cousins, Michael Dooley (29), of the Halting Site, Carrigrohane Road, Cork also proclaimed himself "innocent" after a jury convicted him of murdering Thomas Dooley. 

When the jury returned their unanimous verdict on Tuesday Michael Dooley said aloud: "I didn't harm my cousin judge, it's not fair, I didn't harm my cousin". He went on to say that "an innocent man was going to prison". 

Last Friday, the jurors found Patrick Dooley (36) with an address at Arbutus Grove, Killarney guilty of a "biblical atrocity" by murdering his older brother on the same occasion. 

The previous day the jury had convicted Mr Dooley’s cousin and brother-in-law Thomas Dooley Senior (43) and that man’s son, Thomas Dooley Junior (21), both of the Halting Site, Carrigrohane Road, Cork as well as a male teenager of murdering Mr Dooley. 

The verdicts were unanimous in the case of these five defendants, who had also pleaded not guilty to the charges. 

It was the prosecution case that Mr Dooley died when he was violently attacked by six men as he attended a funeral at Rath Cemetery and suffered what the State described as savage injuries, inflicted by a group armed with bladed weapons and acting with "focused and murderous ferocity" in broad daylight. 

The 12 jurors accepted the State's case that "a biblical atrocity" had occurred in the graveyard that day with "brother killing brother".

In returning their verdict last week in relation to Patrick Dooley, the jury rejected his defence that he was "no Cainite" and was instead in the middle of the attack trying to save his sibling. 

Patrick Dooley had claimed that a feud had been going on for years and that he witnessed "five or six fellas" descend on his deceased brother, while he [Patrick] had jumped in and got slapped. He told gardai that he had tried to pull the men back but it had happened so fast and he could do no more for his brother. 

However Siobhan Dooley (45), the widow of the deceased, said in her evidence that she saw her brother-in-law Patrick Dooley grin and produce a knife before her husband was attacked. 

In his closing speech, Mr Dean Kelly SC, prosecuting, submitted to the jury that the six men had used "medieval violence" to "butcher" the father-of-seven in "an honour killing" during the funeral, carrying out a "biblical atrocity" that was "tragic and heartbreaking as it was ridiculous and stupid". 

Mr Kelly said that "honour" had been offended when Thomas Dooley's daughter had refused to marry Thomas Dooley Junior and their relationship broke down. He submitted that this was "a score that was to be settled". 

The barrister said the trial had a combination of the macabre, a provincial tragedy and appalling medieval violence.

"Yet for all those heady phrases what was left behind was a widow with seven children in the most pointless, wasteful and needless circumstances," he added.

However, Patrick Dooley's defence barrister, Mr Brendan Grehan SC, rejected the proposition that this was the biblical 'Cain and Abel' story and said Patrick Dooley had always denied he had any involvement in murdering his brother.

Thomas Dooley Jnr was also found guilty of assault causing harm to the wife of the late Mr Dooley, Siobhán Dooley, at Rath Cemetery on the same date. He had denied the charge but was also found guilty last week on that count.

During the attack the widow of the deceased sustained a wound which went from her right shoulder and extended to her armpit. She required 45 stitches and 30 staples.

The 12 jurors, who deliberated at Cork Courthouse on Anglesea Street, had the option of returning two verdicts in relation to the murder charge against the six defendants namely; guilty of murder or an outright acquittal.

The jury began their deliberations over a week ago and took 20 hours and 57 minutes in total over five days to return guilty verdicts in respect of the six defendants. The first five verdicts returned in the case were unanimous whilst today's verdict for Daniel Dooley was by a majority verdict.

Following today's guilty verdict for the remaining defendant Daniel Dooley, Ms Justice Mary Ellen Ring thanked the jury for their time.

"It is very important to have your involvement in this process," she said. The judge exempted the ten men and two women from jury service for 15 years. She told them they were entitled to be present at the defendant's sentence hearing next Tuesday, July 30. 

Ms Justice Ring also told the jurors as they were aware murder carries a mandatory sentence and said that she would also have to consider the sentence in relation to the assault on Mrs Dooley.

It is expected that Ms Justice Ring will hand down the mandatory sentence of life imprisonment to five of the defendants on July 30 next and has remanded them in custody until that date. On that date, Mrs Dooley will have an opportunity to make a statement to the court about the impact her husband's death has had on their lives.

The male teenager found guilty of murder will not be sentenced on this date, as it is believed he is to seek a judicial review of his case.

He will next be before the court for mention on October 29.

The Grinning Brother 

Thomas 'Tom' Dooley and his wife Siobhán drove from their home in Killarney on the morning of October 5 to Rath Cemetery in Tralee, where a large crowd had gathered for the funeral of their friend Bridget O'Brien. The couple were running late and had not attended the church part of the ceremony. 

They pulled up at Kelleher’s Garage at Rathass around 11am, directly across the road from the cemetery where people were waiting for the cortege to arrive. Siobhan Dooley (45), the widow of the deceased, said in her evidence that her husband was a few steps ahead of her in the cemetery that morning, when he was approached by his brother-in-law Thomas Dooley Snr, who had something in his hand.

In his closing speech, Dean Kelly SC, prosecuting, said Mrs Dooley had recalled in her evidence that the deceased's brother Patrick Dooley was behind Thomas Dooley Snr.

"She sees Thomas Dooley Snr taking off his coat and producing two weapons, one rusty and one shiny. She said Patrick Dooley was grinning and had a knife... She said there were two men in front and others behind," he said.

Mrs Dooley said that the teenage defendant had a long object in his hands, while Michael Dooley was also carrying a weapon. The jury heard that all Mrs Dooley could do was try to get the attackers away from her husband, so she ran in and 'clawed' Thomas Dooley Snr.

Thomas Dooley Snr's DNA was subsequently recovered from Mrs Dooley's fingernails.

Mr Dooley was "prey" in the graveyard that day, the prosecution argued, telling the jury that the attack was carried out with "absolute ferocity" in a matter of seconds and not minutes.

Mr Kelly said the deceased was the "target of the operation" 37 seconds after he entered the cemetery.

Mrs Dooley had told the trial that her family and Thomas Dooley Snr's family had broken off contact with each other when her daughter refused to marry Thomas Dooley Snr's son, Thomas Dooley Jnr.

She said there was no falling out or words exchanged between her late husband Thomas and his cousin and brother-in-law Thomas Dooley Snr but they simply stopped communicating when their daughter refused to marry Thomas Dooley Jnr.

In his closing statement, prosecutor Mr Kelly said the State had based its case against all six accused on the doctrine of joint enterprise and common design, where a number of persons act together to achieve a common criminal objective and that each person party to the plan is criminally responsible for the acts of the other.

Mr Kelly stressed that the attack had been carried out with 'absolute ferocity' in a matter of seconds and not minutes.

He said Mr Dooley was dying if not already dead as the defendant's footsteps left the cemetery that day and were seen running back to their vans. He said within a matter of seconds after the attack the six men were back at their three respective vans and speeding out the road.

The lawyer told the court that it could not be established who drove the knife into Mr Dooley's back or who chopped into his arm or who drove the knife through his thigh.

However, he said the group of accused men sitting behind him in the courtroom had participated to cause at least serious harm to Mr Dooley and had done so with murderous intent.

The trial heard that the deceased suffered a total of four stabbing injuries following the graveyard attack, one of which severed the femoral artery in his leg and caused him to suffer a fatal blood loss. State pathologist Dr Sally Anne Collis has told the jury that some of the injuries involved could have been inflicted by a machete-type weapon.

In her charge to the jurors over four days, Ms Justice Ring told them that if they find that any of the defendants were involved in the attack and knew their co-accused was carrying a weapon, then they are guilty of murder.

“If you are satisfied that each of these men knew there were knives or bladed weapons and they involved themselves in the attack, then they were all participating in the murder,” she said. 

The judge had also reminded the jury in her charge that there was no allegation to suggest Mr Dooley himself was in possession of a bladed weapon, nor any suggestion of violence on his part or evidence that there was some kind of event taking place that he somehow got caught up in and got injured. 

In relation to the legal issue of joint participation in the charge, Ms Justice Ring said that for any of the defendants to be convicted of murder, each must be found to have assisted the commission of the crime and must have intended by their actions to assist.

She added that if the jury was not sure if all of the accused were in possession of a weapon, the law says that if an accused person knew that their co-accused was carrying a weapon, they knew that he intended to act to cause murder or serious injury.

Ms Justice Ring said that if the jury was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that one or more of the accused was either there or there with the necessary intentions, then the jury must look at each accused individually and make decisions based on each of the accused.