The Supreme Court has dismissed an appeal by the initiator of a plan to lure and rob a Co Mayo man who ended up being badly beaten and locked in the boot of a car.
The five-judge court found William Twomey’s efforts to undermine the scheme he earlier devised were “simply inadequate” to undo his actions or to prevent the crime.
Twomey (60), a financial adviser with an address at Havelock Place, Warrenpoint, Co Down, was found guilty in November 2021 at the non-jury Special Criminal Court of robbery, assault and of demanding money with menaces from Edward McAndrew in December 2017. He was acquitted of a charge of falsely imprisoning McAndrew, a second-hand construction equipment dealer, from Curradrish, Foxford.
Twomey’s trial heard Mr McAndrew was set upon in a “barbaric” attack by men who beat him with iron bars, demanded money and robbed him at a remote location in Co Louth. Mr McAndrew, who was kept for some time in the boot of a car, had been lured to Omeath by the gang, who claimed to be part of the Continuity IRA, on the pretence that they had plant machinery to sell to him.
The sentencing judge described Twomey as the “initiator of a joint enterprise” but said the “results went well beyond” what he had contemplated. He has already served the sentence imposed on him.
In a ruling on Tuesday, the Supreme Court’s Ms Justice Iseult O’Malley described a background of friendship and falling out between Twomey and Mr McAndrew. She said Twomey denied he was motivated to seek revenge against his former friend, claiming instead he was owed money.
He recruited Tony Finglas, who had been employed previously to collect debt from “difficult” tenants. Finglas (53), also of Havelock Place, pleaded guilty to demanding money with menaces from Mr McAndrew and was sentenced to four years and nine months in December 2020.
A detective garda confirmed at the trial he spoke with Twomey about his concern there might be aggressive action towards Mr McAndrew. The detective advised him to contact the Police Service of Northern Ireland as the attack was expected to happen north of the Border. Twomey claimed he rang a general number but was told this was a matter for gardaí as Mr McAndrew, who he did not warn, lived in the South.
Appealing to the court, Twomey submitted he communicated his intention to withdraw from the plan in a clear and timely manner. His lawyers contended he took reasonable and proportionate steps to nullify or countermand his participation.
The Director of Public Prosecutions submitted that contact with the two police forces was not only ineffectual but was known by Twomey to have been such.
Ms Justice O’Malley said the unanimous view from across the common law world is that the withdrawal defence requires evidence of a clear, unequivocal and timely communication to the principal offender. She accepted that Twomey told Finglas the plan should cease but said he knew Finglas was not dissuaded and would proceed.
Twomey took “some” timely steps to prevent the crime by contacting two police forces, but his action did not amount to all that was “objectively reasonable and proportionate” given his earlier involvement, she said.
The court dismissed the appeal.
- Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Join The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date
- Listen to our Inside Politics podcast for the best political chat and analysis
