DPP v Waters and Others

 
FREE EXCERPT

2003 WJSC-CCA 4628

THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL

Finlay C.J.

Gannon J.

Blayney J.

Nos. 87, 85 & 83 of 1989
DPP v. WATERS & ORS
THE PEOPLE (AT THE SUIT OF THE
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS)
V.
PATRICK WATERS, PATRICK HOLLAND
AND MICHAEL ANTHONY MAUGHAN
Applicants
1

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT OF THE COURT delivered on the 21st day of May 1990 by FINLAY C.J.

FINLAY C.J.
2

These are three applications for leave to appeal against severity of sentence in three inter-linked cases in which each of the three Applicants pleaded guilty to a charge, the same offence, that on the 6th April in the County and City of Dublin they knowingly had in his possession explosive substances to wit 7 ½ lbs. of frangex explosives, 6 detonators, 1 roll of cortex detonating cord and a quantity of fuse wire in such circumstances as to give rise to a reasonable suspicion that he did not have it in his possession for a lawful object.

3

In relation to the offence to which each of these accused pleaded guilty, each of them was sentenced by the Special Criminal Court to ten years penal servitude to date from the date of the imposition of the sentence. Broadly speaking, two separate points have been taken with regard to the sentence, and they have been taken and shared equally between the parties and in addition to that, separately, each of the parties has urged matters arising from evidence concerning the sentence, such as their age and the extent of their participation which would entitle them to leniency. The first matter is that the Court has carfully considered the differentiating circumstances which have been asserted on behalf of each of these three Applicants, and is satisfied that there are no good grounds in principle for distinguishing between them in relation to the appropriate sentence to be imposed upon them, one from the other. Though they are different in ages and though they took different parts in the entire transaction out of which this charge arose which consisted of the larceny and taking away by Mr. Waters of the explosive with the direct and immediate assistance of Mr. Maughan, its transport by the two of them to Dublin and its handling and arrangment, including arrangements for its transfer on by Mr. Holland, that though these are different parts they are parts equally reprehensible and equally...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL