Jury begins deliberations in trial over Dublin park murder

Feri Anghel denies murdering Ioan Artene Bob (49) in a Dublin park in April 2018

A Central Criminal Court jury has begun considering their verdict in the trial of Feri Anghel, who denies murdering a Romanian man in a Dublin park. Photograph: Matt Kavanagh

A Central Criminal Court jury has begun considering their verdict in the trial of Feri Anghel, who denies murdering a Romanian man in a Dublin park. Photograph: Matt Kavanagh

 

A Central Criminal Court jury has begun considering their verdict in the trial of Feri Anghel, who denies murdering a Romanian man in a Dublin park.

Ms Justice Eileen Creedon told the six men and four women of the jury that there are three possible verdicts available to them, guilty of murder, not guilty or not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter.

Mr Anghel (40), a member of the Romani community, has pleaded not guilty to murdering Ioan Artene Bob (49) at a location in Co Dublin on April 13th, 2018.

Ms Justice Creedon said the prosecution has presented a circumstantial case.

The jury, she said, must consider each piece of evidence and then stand back and consider the evidence as a whole.

“It is the cumulative weight that you consider,” she said, “if it proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused committed the crime, then you convict.”

The prosecution must satisfy the jury that each strand of evidence is true and that the inference suggested by the prosecution is warranted, the judge said.

Murder, she said, is defined by the Criminal Justice Act 1964, which states that where a person kills another unlawfully the killing shall not be murder unless the accused person intended to kill or cause serious injury.

The jury must first decide whether Mr Anghel killed the deceased and if they are not satisfied of that beyond a reasonable doubt they must acquit. If they are satisfied that Mr Anghel killed Mr Bob, they must then consider if he had the intention to kill or to cause serious injury.

If the killing is proven but not the intent then the correct verdict would be manslaughter which, Ms Justice Creedon said, is an unlawful killing where the accused committed an unlawful or dangerous act or intended some physical harm but not serious injury or death.

A murder verdict, she said, is brought if the jury is satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused killed Mr Bob and that when he did so he intended to kill or to at least cause serious injury.

The jury will return to the court on Thursday to continue deliberating.