A judge at the trial of three Englishmen charged in connection with a €440 million drug seizure today reminded the jury that they are entitled to draw inferences from the fact that two of the men declined to give explanations to gardaí when asked to do so.
Judge Seán Ó Donnabháin said that under legislation introduced last year, a jury is entitled to draw an inference if an accused person fails to mention a fact during questioning that they subsequently rely upon for their defence when they appear in court.
Martin Wanden (45) of no fixed abode, Perry Wharrie (48) of Pyrles Lane, Loughton, Essex and Joe Daly (41) of Carrisbrooke Avenue, Bexley, Kent each deny three charges including possessing cocaine for sale or supply at Dunlough Bay on July 2nd 2007.
Judge Ó Donnabháin reminded the jury that Mr Daly did not give the explanation that he gave in court as to how he ended up at Dunlough Bay on the morning in question when he was questioned by gardaí following his arrest near Schull on July 4th 2007.
And he reminded them that Mr Wanden told gardaí that he was making no comment to them on advice from his solicitor when he was asked by gardaí to explain how he was found floating in the sea at Dunlough Bay near where 1.5 tonnes of cocaine was discovered.
"It would be perfectly in order for you to infer that because the man was told to keep his mouth shut by his solicitor that that was the right thing to do," said Judge Ó Donnabháin, adding that the jury could equally draw other inferences if they so wished.
Judge Ó Donnabháin - addressing the jury on the 40th day of the trial at Cork Circuit Criminal Court -summarised the prosecution case against each of the defendants, outlining the principle allegations against them.
"Daly arrived in Ireland with the blue jeep and with what the State calls the drugs RIB. The jeep was insured in his own name and his own address. He is still in the country on (July 2nd 2007) and he is there helping out at the top of Dunlough Bay when the drugs arrive.
"The State says further that he left and disappeared for two days. What can you infer from that? He did not stand his ground. They say his comings and goings are not innocent. He was regularly in the presence of other persons involved."
"They say he is associated with Farnamanagh (the rented house in the area where gardaí found the removed seating from the drugs RIB) and that none of those things are innocent and that taken together they allow you to infer his guilt," he added.
Judge Ó Donnabháin said Mr Daly's evidence was that the State got it all wrong and that he simply did a favour for his brother, Michael by bringing in the jeep and boat and that when he saw what was happening he was in such confusion that he got out of the place.
"The State case against Wanden is; 'Look, he is caught red-handed, this man nearly drowned because of his involvement. He came with the RIB, he is in the water in possession.
"Mr Wanden said they (the prosecution) jumped the gun, they got it wrong, look more closely at this," said Judge Ó Donnabháin before he reminded the jury of Mr Wanden's explanation as to how he ended up in the sea with the drugs at Dunlough Bay .
With regard to Mr Wharrie, Judge Ó Donnabháin said: "The State says: 'Look, he is there on the cliff as this emergency with the drugs happened, he is there as a member of a joint enterprise'. Also they point at the way he fled the scene."
The case will continue on Monday.
