The Director of Public Prosecutions v Tyler Jackson

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Court: Court of Appeal (Ireland)
• Judge: Mr. Justice MacGrath
• Judgment Date: 21 February 2025
• Neutral Citation: [2025] IECA 88
• Docket Number: Court of Appeal Rec No.: CCAOT0250/2023

Between/

The People (at the Suit of the Director of Public Prosections)

Respondent

and

Tyler Jackson

Appellant

[2025] IECA 88

Edwards J.

Burns J.

MacGrath J.

Court of Appeal Rec No.: CCAOT0250/2023

Bill No.: CCDP60/2022

THE COURT OF APPEAL

Conviction – Murder – Admissibility of evidence – Appellant appealing against conviction – Whether the trial judge erred in failing to grant an application for a discharge of the jury

Facts: The appellant, Mr Jackson, was charged with the murder of Mr Quinn on 12 July 2018 at Bridge Street, Mallow, Co. Cork. On 2 October 2023, the appellant pleaded not guilty. Following his trial, the jury returned a majority guilty verdict on 12 October 2023. A mandatory life sentence was imposed on 17 October 2023 at the Central Criminal Court. The appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal against his conviction. The notice of appeal contained sixteen grounds. Thirteen were abandoned at hearing and grounds seven, eight and nine were retained: (7) the trial judge erred in law and/or in principle in failing to grant an application for a discharge of the jury in circumstances where one witness gave evidence which was an attack on the character of the applicant; (8) the trial judge erred in law and in fact in permitting prejudicial evidence to be admitted pursuant to a Criminal Justice Act 2006 s. 16 application; (9) the trial judge erred in law and/or in principle in permitting an application pursuant to s. 16 in circumstances where the witness gave evidence that she did not agree with the contents of her statement.

Held by the Court that the evidence of the witness to which objection was taken was “I had told Connor about them hitting me before, yes”; this answer was given against an acknowledged and accepted requirement for some background evidence and in the context of evidence previously given that there was not a good relationship between the deceased and the witness. While the appellant’s submission at trial was that the defence case was that the deceased was the aggressor, and although not expressly referenced by the trial judge, the Court noted that Mr Quinn’s evidence was not that the deceased had been assaulted, rather that he was. The Court held that the trial judge’s exercise of her discretion must be seen in that light. The Court found it difficult to see how that single unprompted answer went to the crux of the case. The Court was not satisfied that it had been established that the trial judge was wrong in the exercise of the broad discretion which she had in deciding whether to discharge a jury as an exceptional measure. The Court noted that in her charge to the jury the trial judge did not give any express directions about that aspect of Mr Quinn’s evidence, neither did she emphasise or repeat the answer; no requisition was raised in respect of her charge on that point, or of a failure to charge the jury in any other way. While the Court was not expressly referred to evidence of other witnesses, it noted that a witness who was called later in the trial, Mr Cannon, an uncle of the deceased’s cousins, was questioned about aggression. The Court rejected ground seven. The Court did not accept that the trial judge assessed or determined the issue of reliability in an evidential lacuna. The Court was not satisfied that she fell into error in that regard. In the circumstances, the Court rejected grounds eight and nine.

The Court held that, as all retained grounds had been rejected, the appeal must be dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.

JUDGMENT of the Court delivered by Mr. Justice MacGrath on the 21 ^st day February 2025

Introduction

1 . Mr Tyler Jackson, the appellant, was charged with the murder of Mr Conor Quinn on the 12 ^th July 2018 at Bridge Street, Mallow, Co. Cork. On the 2 ^nd October 2023, the appellant pleaded not guilty. Following his trial, the jury returned a majority guilty verdict on the 12 ^th October 2023. A mandatory life sentence was imposed on the 17 ^th October 2023 at the Central Criminal Court. This is an appeal against his conviction.

Factual Background

2 . The evidence is that there had been difficulties, or bad blood, between the deceased and the appellant prior to the 12 ^th July 2018. On that date, the deceased attended at Cahirmee Horse Fair in Buttevant, North County Cork, accompanied by his first cousins, Samantha, Luke, and Stephen Quinn and their uncle, Richard Canon. They had travelled there in Stephen Quinn's car. On the return journey to their home in Killavullen, they stopped in Mallow for food. The deceased was in the front passenger seat. The car was parked on Main Street when the deceased saw the appellant walking along the footpath. He got out of the car to confront the appellant. In their initial interaction they “squared” up to each other, which ended with the appellant running away. Mr Quinn sought out the appellant. The evidence of witnesses in the Town Park was that the deceased actively sought a black man and a white man and threatened that he would ‘ kill’ or ‘ fix’ the white man. Their evidence was that the deceased had a “strap” or an “extendable black plastic object” with him.

3 . At 8:38 pm, when the deceased's party had returned to their vehicle and were travelling on Bridge Street, the deceased again saw the appellant. He left the passenger seat of the car and ran in the direction of the appellant. The evidence of Samantha Quinn was that the appellant “ had his hands up”, like fists, at this point. A second brief physical altercation occurred during which the deceased was stabbed once in the chest. The evidence of Mr Quinn's party was that the appellant struck Mr Quinn in the chest. None of these witnesses saw a knife in the appellant's hand.

4 . An ambulance was present on the street at the time. Dashcam footage from the ambulance showed the appellant running away. Ms Denise O'Connor, a paramedic who was in the ambulance, characterised the incident as a split-second interaction during which the deceased collided with the appellant. She also stated that the appellant pushed up his hands into the deceased's chest, after which they separated. The evidence of Mr Liam Lynch, which was read into evidence pursuant to s. 21 of the Criminal Justice Act 1984, was that the appellant seemed to be defending himself, having no time to react due to the speed at which Mr Quinn was running at him.

5 . The deceased went back in the direction of his companions, saying “ he is after stabbing me”. He leaned against a nearby wall before slowly falling to the ground. He never regained consciousness and died later that night. The deceased had consumed a quantity of alcohol on the day, and the results of a postmortem toxicology examination revealed the presence of cocaine and other drugs in his system.

6 . When the appellant left the area after the second confrontation, he got into a car driven by a Mr Mark McCarthy, who knew him to see. The appellant told him to “ just drive up the road”. When Mr McCarthy asked where, the appellant replied “ Ballydaheen”. Mr McCarthy gave evidence of the appellant hanging onto the door and looking in the mirror behind. He did not see a knife in the possession of the appellant.

7 . The statement of Christine Kearney, the only witness who saw the appellant with a knife, was admitted pursuant to s. 16 of the Criminal Justice Act 2006 (“the 2006 Act”). The ruling of the trial judge admitting this statement is the main ground of challenge on this appeal.

Grounds of Appeal

8 . The Notice of Appeal contained 16 grounds. Thirteen were abandoned at hearing; grounds seven, eight and nine being retained. They are as follows:-

“Ground 7 — The Learned Trial Judge erred in law and/or in principle in failing to grant an application for a discharge of the jury in circumstances where one witness gave evidence which was an attack on the character of the Applicant.

Ground 8 — The Learned Trial Judge erred in law and in fact in permitting prejudicial evidence to be admitted pursuant to a section 16 application.

Ground 9 — The Learned Trial Judge erred in law and/or in principle in permitting an application pursuant to section 16 of the Criminal Evidence Act, 2006 in circumstances where the witness gave evidence that she did not agree with the contents of her statement.”

Ground 7 – Failure to Discharge the Jury

9 . Ground seven relates to a failed application for a discharge of the jury, which was made during the evidence of Mr Stephen Quinn. He gave evidence on day three of the trial and it was agreed that his evidence could be led. He was questioned in direct examination as to whether he recognised the deceased, to which he replied that he knew his face. He was then asked whether he had met him before, to which he replied “ yes, there was a previous incident before in Mallow a year previous”. Counsel for the prosecution then told the witness that “ we don't need to know about that, but I think there wasn't a good relationship between yourself and Tiggy Jackson; is that correct?”. The witness replied “ No, there wasn't no”. Then counsel asked: “ And I think Conor knew about this; is that correct?”. The witness replied “Yes, I had told Connor about them hitting me before, yes”.

10 . An application was made to have the jury discharged because there was now before the jury evidence that the accused had assaulted the witness on a previous occasion. While counsel for the defence accepted that the case could not have been conducted without a general reference to some background information, he contended that the witness had gone a step further and had stated that the accused had assaulted someone. No suggestion was made of impropriety on the part of counsel for the prosecution who, in reply, observed that in his opening he had indicated to the jury that there would be evidence of bad blood, or a disagreement, but that they should focus on the night of the...