NewsCourts

Wife-killer Joe O'Reilly awaiting court verdict

Joe O'Reilly awaiting latest court ruling
Joe O'Reilly awaiting latest court ruling

The Court of Appeal has reserved judgment on whether Joe O'Reilly can apply to have his conviction for murdering his wife declared a miscarriage of justice.

In July 2007 Joe O’Reilly was convicted by a Central Criminal Court jury and sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of his wife at their home in the Naul, Co. Dublin. Rachel O'Reilly's badly beaten body was found in the bedroom of her home on October 4 2004.

The 42-year-old has lodged an application under Section 2 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1993 to have his conviction declared a miscarriage of justice.

O’Reilly is currently serving a life sentence for the murder and previously lost an appeal against his murder conviction in 2009. Chief Justice John Murray had said its grounds were not well founded.

Counsel for the Director of Public Prosecutions, Brendan Grehan SC, asked the Court of Appeal to dismiss O'Reilly's application as an "abuse of process" because it was not based on any new or newly discovered facts as required under the Act. 

On day four of O'Reilly's trial for murder the court registrar was advised that a portion of the book of evidence had been left in the jury room.

Trial judge Mr Justice Barry White had made it clear, Mr Grehan said, that he would discharge the jury if any of them had read any portion of the book of evidence and the trial would continue if none of them had read any part of it.

The foreman of the jury was then asked whether any juror had read any portion of the book of evidence and his reply was: 'not to my knowledge, no'.

Mr Grehan said that exchange took place with 11 jurors, the trial judge, Mr O'Reilly and all counsel present in court. The suggestion that one of the jurors simply sat there and stayed dumb did not arise because the “eyes of everybody in court” would have been looking at their reactions.

Mr Grehan said O'Reilly met with his legal team before the court sat, he was informed of what had transpired and informed that if any of the jurors had read any part of the book of evidence the jury would be discharged.

Not only was no application made to discharge the jury, but those were O'Reilly's instructions to his legal team - that if nobody had read any portion of the book of evidence the trial could proceed, Mr Grehan said.

It was "impossible to contemplate how the significance could not have been appreciated" by O'Reilly at the time and his case was “simply unstateable” and “bound to fail," Mr Grehan said.

Counsel said the "very experienced" Mr Justice White had rigorously assessed the evidence in the trial and O'Reilly had enjoyed favourable rulings up until that point. Mr Justice White had also ruled inadmissible O'Reilly's appearance on RTE's Late Late Show, Mr Grehan said.

President of the Court of Appeal Mr Justice Seán Ryan, who sat with Mr Justice George Birmingham and Mr Justice John Edwards, said the court would reserve judgment to a date “as soon as possible”.

O'Reilly lost an appeal against conviction in 2009 while in August 2012 he failed in a subsequent attempt to have his conviction quashed after arguing his detention in the Midlands Prison was unlawful.

In November 2012 O'Reilly was granted legal aid in his bid to have his conviction declared a miscarriage of justice after the State lodged no objection.

Section 2 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1993 states that a person who remains convicted after appeal may apply to the court to have their convictions quashed based on alleged new of newly discovered facts that show a miscarriage of justice occurred.