Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Thursday, 12 Apr 2001

Vol. 534 No. 5

Ceisteanna–Questions Priority Questions - Garda Investigations.

Deirdre Clune

Question:

5 Ms Clune asked the Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform the reason a car involved in a fatal road accident was scrapped by gardaí before the driver (details supplied) who was charged with dangerous driving causing the death of a person (details supplied) at Lehenaghmore, Togher, County Cork, on 3 May 1999, could have it examined for alleged defects; the action which has been taken to ensure no prosecution is prohibited in the future as a consequence of the gardaí so acting; the further reason the family of the deceased were not kept informed regarding the progress of the court proceedings which resulted in the High Court prohibiting the prosecution of the driver; and his views on whether it is acceptable that they first learned of the outcome of the High Court case from newspaper reports. [10842/01]

At the outset I must state that I am somewhat limited in what I can say in this case as the matter is due before Cork Circuit Court on 1 May 2001. I have been informed by the Garda authorities that a single vehicle accident occurred at Lehenaghmore, Togher, Cork, at approximately 6.25 p.m. on 3 May 1999 and that there were seven occupants in the vehicle and one of the passengers was fatally injured. I am further informed by the Garda authorities that a full investigation was conducted into the circumstances of the accident and that this involved, among other things, a detailed examination of the vehicle which had been extensively damaged.

I am informed by the Garda authorities that the car was preserved in the car compound at Togher Garda station until 28 June 1999, when it was removed to a scrap yard. I understand that on 29 June 1999, the driver of the car delivered a prepared statement to Togher Garda station setting out his version of the circumstances of the accident and that the Garda file on the matter was submitted to the Director of Public Prosecutions for direction on 21 July 1999.

I am further informed that the DPP's directions were received on 1 December 1999 and were that the driver be prosecuted for dangerous driving causing death. These proceedings commenced on 22 December 1999 when the accused was arrested and brought before Cork District Court. The accused was subsequently sent forward for trial to Cork Circuit Court and the case stands adjourned to 1 May 2001.

On 23 February 2000, however, a solicitor acting for the defendant wrote to the acting State Solicitor requesting permission to have the vehicle examined. Inquiries were immediately undertaken by the gardaí to locate the vehicle and it was subsequently located in the scrap yard but the engine had been removed and some damage had been caused during storage. I am informed that the vehicle, minus the engine, was returned to Togher Garda station on 2 June 2000, the defendant's solicitor was informed and an assessor, on behalf of the defendant, subsequently examined the vehicle.

I am further informed by the Garda authorities that the defendant commenced judicial review proceedings before the High Court seeking a permanent injunction preventing his trial on the charge of dangerous driving causing death proceeding. In an ex-tempore judgment delivered on the 29 March 2001, the High Court granted the relief sought. This was without prejudice to the defendant being prosecuted on any other charges that may have arisen. The question of any appeal in relation to that decision is a matter for the Director of Public Prosecutions who is independent in the performance of his functions.

In relation to the circumstances surrounding the disposal of the vehicle, I am informed by the Garda authorities that an investigation has commenced in relation to this matter and whether it amounts to a breach of the Garda Síochána (Disciplinary Regulations).

The Garda authorities have also informed me that procedures in relation to the retention or disposal of vehicles involved in accidents will be examined taking into account the implications of the High Court judgment and any new procedures will be introduced where necessary.

It is a matter of concern that the family of the victim first learned of the outcome of the High Court case from media reports. I am informed by the Garda authorities in this regard that the family were in regular touch with the gardaí at Togher and that when the case went before the High Court, the process and the problems arising were explained to the family. However, as the case was dealt with by way of affidavits, the gardaí were not notified of the date when the case was due be heard before the High Court.

While all of us must be careful not to say anything which could prejudice any future proceedings that might arise in this case, I accept fully that should it not be possible to pursue a serious case because of some procedural or other fault that would be a mater of deep concern. In the circumstances I have asked the Garda Commissioner to keep me fully informed of developments in relation to this matter.

I thank the Minister for his reply. As far as I am aware from my discussions with the family, the first they knew of the case was when they were informed by a neighbour who had read it in a newspaper. The Minister said that an investigation was under way. Can he indicate when we will have a report on that investigation? Is it normal practice that the family would not be shown the courtesy of being kept informed about the case? If they had been informed of developments they could have presented themselves in court on the day. It must be remembered that an 18 year old lost his life in this accident. It is not just a case of a car accident. A life has been lost so I ask the Minister to give me some idea of the investigation and when he expects to have it completed.

The position is that it is a matter for the Director of Public Prosecutions to appeal. Obviously I have no control, for very desirable reasons, over what the Director of Public Prosecutions may do in instances such as this one and in those circumstances, unfortunately, I cannot advise the Deputy of where precisely the investigation stands. I have asked the Garda Commissioner to keep me informed of progress in this particular matter.

It is a matter of great regret that the family concerned were not informed of the fact that the case was being heard before the High Court on 29 March 2001. The reason for that is that the gardaí themselves were not notified and apparently the case of judicial review was dealt with by way of affidavits from the gardaí. That would be normal in such circumstances. Apparently the gardaí were not made aware of this nor were they made aware of the proceedings, and they only learned of the decision when the family contacted the gardaí at Togher station on 30 March 2001.

I have asked that the question of whether there could be improved communications procedures to try to avoid this situation be examined. I would like to extend my deepest sympathy to the family of the deceased in this very serious matter. I have asked the Garda Commissioner to keep me fully informed and I fully accept that what occurred in this instance was, to say the least, most regrettable.

That concludes Priority Questions. We now move on to Ordinary Questions. Question No. 6 is in the name of Deputy Creed.

Top
Share