D.P.P. -v- Michael Murphy [2005] IECCA 52 (05 May 2005)

D.P.P. -v- Michael Murphy [2005] IECCA 52 (05 May 2005)

The court held that, although there were failures to comply with electronic recording regulations and concerns about the circumstances of certain admissions, these did not render the confessional evidence inadmissible under s.27(4) of the Criminal Justice Act 1984. The appellant's detention and its extension were lawful, the admissions following the meeting with his girlfriend were voluntary, and the evidence as a whole, including circumstantial and DNA evidence, was sufficient to support the conviction. The trial judge's directions to the jury were adequate. The appeal was dismissed.

Citation
[2005] IECCA 52
Parties
Prosecutor/respondent: The People (Director of Public Prosecutions); Appellant: Michael Murphy
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
05 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction
Outcome
leave to appeal refused; conviction upheld
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Confessions, Electronic Recording of Interviews, Circumstantial Evidence, DNA Evidence, Cause of Death, Fair Procedures, Detention and Custody, Extension of Detention, Emotional Manipulation, Jury Directions
Criminal Law Admissibility of Confessions Electronic Recording of Interviews Circumstantial Evidence DNA Evidence Cause of Death Fair Procedures Detention and Custody +3 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The People (Director of Public Prosecutions)

Prosecutor/respondent

Michael Murphy

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether failure to electronically record interviews rendered confessional evidence inadmissible
  2. 2 Whether the appellant's detention and extension thereof were lawful
  3. 3 Whether admissions made after meeting with girlfriend were admissible

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that, although there were failures to comply with electronic recording regulations and concerns about the circumstances of certain admissions, these did not render the confessional evidence inadmissible under s.27(4) of the Criminal Justice Act 1984. The appellant's detention and its extension were lawful, the admissions following the meeting with his girlfriend were voluntary, and the evidence as a whole, including circumstantial and DNA evidence, was sufficient to support the conviction. The trial judge's directions to the jury were adequate. The appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

leave to appeal refused; conviction upheld