Defence delivers closing speeches in Kevin Lunney assault trial

• Published date: 04 August 2021

Michael O'Higgins SC addressed the three-judge, non-jury court on behalf of the accused known as YZ, who cannot t be named for legal reasons.

Mr O'Higgins warned the court to avoid coming to a conclusion that might appear logical based on suspicion but that falls short of the required level of proof.

Counsel for Alan O'Brien said his client has no case to answer as the prosecution has not proven that he was in Cavan on the day of the offences against the Quinn Industrial Holdings (QIH) director.

Counsel for Darren Redmond said the prosecution had "overreached". He challenged the identification of his client on CCTV and said mobile phone location data that the prosecution said showed his client traveling to Cavan on the day of the offences had actually shown "nothing other than the presence of a telephone possibly within a vehicle".

Counsel for Luke O'Reilly will deliver his closing speech on Friday.

YZ (40); Alan O'Brien (40), of Shelmalier Road, East Wall, Dublin 3; Darren Redmond (27), from Caledon Road, East Wall, Dublin 3; and Luke O'Reilly (68), with an address at Mullahoran Lower, Kilcogy, Co Cavan; have all pleaded not (NOT) guilty to false imprisonment and intentionally causing serious harm to Mr Lunney at Drumbrade, Ballinagh, Co Cavan on September 17th, 2019.

Mr O'Higgins said he concede his client's actions were suspicious. But, he said, the circumstantial evidence pointed to by the prosecution should not lead the court to "inexorably conclude that the only reasonable interpretation is" that the men responsible are his client and two other men who were traveling in a Renault Kangoo van in Cavan on the same day.

Counsel also said that the court should consider whether the prosecution has excluded the possibility that Mr Lunney's DNA was planted inside the van, which was subsequently destroyed by a fire at a storage yard in Cavan in February 2020.

Wiped clean

Mr O'Higgins said the court appeared to have taken the view during legal argument in the trial that unless there was footage of a man in dark clothing planting evidence, the defence should not even pursue it.

Mr O'Higgins said the first question the court should ask is, "is there a smell off this?" and to consider that if his client was as forensically aware as the prosecution has suggested, why would he not have made sure the van was wiped clean?

Gardaí, he said, had given contradictory evidence about whether the van was locked or unlocked when they seized it on October 23, 2019. Gardai took...