D. P. P. -v- Gillespie [2011] IEHC 236 (09 June 2011)

D. P. P. -v- Gillespie [2011] IEHC 236 (09 June 2011)

Whether a breach of Regulation 8(1) occurs when a prisoner is on a phone call while rights are read is a question of fact, not law, and must be determined by the District Judge based on the circumstances. The mere fact of being on a phone call is not conclusive of a breach. If a breach is found, the judge has discretion to exclude evidence only if the accused was prejudiced by the breach.

Citation
[2011] IEHC 236
Parties
Prosecutor: The Director of Public Prosecutions (at the suit of Garda Geraldine Tormley); Accused: Colin Gillespie
Jurisdiction
Ireland
Judgment Date
09 June 2011
Procedural Posture
Consultative Case Stated / High Court Determination on Case Stated From District Court
Outcome
Questions remitted to District Judge for determination of facts and application of law; no final determination by High Court on breach or exclusion of evidence.
Legal Topics
Treatment of Persons in Custody, Admissibility of Evidence, Right to Legal Advice, Compliance With Custody Regulations
Criminal Law Road Traffic Law Constitutional Law Treatment of Persons in Custody Admissibility of Evidence Right to Legal Advice Compliance With Custody Regulations

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 4 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Director of Public Prosecutions (at the suit of Garda Geraldine Tormley)

Prosecutor

Colin Gillespie

Accused

Procedural Posture

Consultative Case Stated / High Court Determination on Case Stated From District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether being on a phone call while rights are read constitutes a breach of Regulation 8(1) of the 1987 Regulations
  2. 2 Whether the District Judge has discretion to exclude evidence obtained following a breach of the 1987 Regulations

Ratio Decidendi

Whether a breach of Regulation 8(1) occurs when a prisoner is on a phone call while rights are read is a question of fact, not law, and must be determined by the District Judge based on the circumstances. The mere fact of being on a phone call is not conclusive of a breach. If a breach is found, the judge has discretion to exclude evidence only if the accused was prejudiced by the breach.

Court Disposition

Questions remitted to District Judge for determination of facts and application of law; no final determination by High Court on breach or exclusion of evidence.

Orders

  • Remit question (a) to District Judge to determine as a question of fact whether there was a breach of Regulation 8(1)
  • If a breach is found, District Judge to determine if the accused was prejudiced and whether to exclude evidence, having regard to relevant case law