Dubliner Paul Ward has won his appeal against his conviction for the murder of journalist Veronica Guerin.
The Court of Criminal Appeal overturned the conviction this morning, but Ward will not be set free as he is serving a 12-year jail sentence for his part in riots at Mountjoy Prison between January 4th and January 6th, 1997. He was convicted of this crime in July 1999.
The appeal was heard over four days earlier this month by the three-judge court, consisting of Mr Justice Murphy, Mr Justice Ó Caoimh and Mr Justice McKechnie.
The court reserved judgment on March 8th. In November 1998, Ward (37), was jailed for life by the non-jury Special Criminal Court for the murder of Ms Guerin (36), a Sunday Independentreporter, at Naas Road, Clondalkin, on June 26th, 1996.
She was shot dead by a pillion passenger on a motorcycle which drew up alongside her at traffic lights.
The focus of the appeal was an attack on the credibility of a State protected witness Charles Bowden whose evidence was crucial in securing Ward's conviction.
Mr Peter Charleton SC, for the DPP, argued the court was well aware of the defects in Bowden's credibility and had specified these. But Mr Barry White SC, for Ward, said the court had erred in not treating Bowden as a "supergrass".
Today's judgment said: "In those circumstances [of the case against Ward] the case of the prosecution consisted virtually, if not entirely, of the evidence given by Mr Charles Bowden".
On Ward's conviction, the judgment later said: "The court did not base its conclusion on the manner in which Mr Bowden gave his evidence or his demeanour. Instead it examined the logic of Mr Bowden's position. It fully accepted that Bowden would lie and lie readily and unhesitatingly to protect his own interests irrespective of the consequences of others".
Part of the case against Ward was that he had received the gun and motorbike used in the killing of Ms Guerin and then disposed of them. But today's judgment said: "There is no express evidence whatever that a motor bicycle arrived at the house of Paul Ward on the 26th of June, 1996".
The judgment said: "The case was presented at all times on the basis that Mr Ward had participated in the planning of an atrocious crime. The evidence adduced by the State shows that he did not. It was at all times contended that both the motor cycle and the gun were delivered to the premises at Walkinstown Road and that was the express conclusion of the trial court.
"The contention that both the bike and the gun were so delivered was not supported by the evidence. This court would not be justified in assuming that the Special Criminal Court was or could have been satisfied that the gun was received by Mr Ward and the bike was not".
The Court of Criminal Appeal also took into consideration evidence consisting of the transcripts of the hearings in the cases of the DPP v. Meehanfrom July 1999 and the DPP v. Gilliganfrom March 2001, and the judgments of the Special Criminal Court in those cases.
On these, the judgment said: "to avoid any possible injustice this Court permitted the applicant to extract material from the transcripts in the two subsequent trials relating to certain specified topics which might have had the capacity to undermine the substance of a fair trial.
"In fact the evidence adduced was not material to this court in reaching its decision but it might be said that it illustrated further, if that were necessary, the difficulties of ensuring the integrity of the evidence of an accomplice whose evidence is such that he must be admitted to a witness protection programme".
The judgment finished by saying: "It is comforting to note one merit for the non-jury court system, namely, that where an error does occur in its procedures or judgment it can be corrected by this court. A comparable error in a decision reached by a jury might not be detected".
