Shannon Court Report. Eoin Rice and other cases.

Judge loses the plot atfer being asked to recuse himself from case.

In Shannon District Court yesterday, four well know anti-war activists were up before Judge Joseph Mangan.
Two of the defendants asked the Judge to absent himself from their case because of previous remarks made by the judge regarding Iraq and Shannon.
another defendant was imprisoned for refusing to agree to harsh new bail conditions.

Shannon District Court, Thursday 12 Feb 2004.
Judge Joseph Mangan Presiding
Inspector Thomas Kennedy prosecuting
Defendants:
Conor Cregan
Eoin Rice
Nunria Mustafa
John Dunne

Judges are meant to be impartial and objective. They are meant to differentiate between one case and another, and they are not meant to show malice or arrogance on the bench.

In a shameful display of arrogance yesterday, a District Court Judge imprisoned one man and tried to put restrictive conditions on three other defendants, with no obvious motion other than injured pride.

Nuria Mustafa, an Iraqi and her husband John Dunne made their third appearance in court in relation to allegedly blocking traffic during a peaceful protest at Shannon in June 2003.

Eoin Rice was appearing in relation to charges arising from arrests on Dec 6th and 7th 2003, including dangerous driving, obstructing a police vehicle and behaviour likely to lead to a breach of the peace.
he had already appeared on a number of occassions and was on 5 Euro bail.

Conor Cregan was arrested along with Mr. Rice on Dec 7th and was charged with behaviour likely to lead to a breach of the peace. Conor had appeared on a previous occassion and had police bail.

All four deny the charges against them.

Despite knowing that 3 of the defendants had travlled long distances, the Judge made them wait until all the other cases were dealt with. Nuria and John had travelled from Galway, and had arranged for someone to babysit their young daughter. Eoin Rice had travelled from Dublin.

At 3:15, the court was almost entirely empty, and the clerk called the cases of Nuria Mustafa and John Dunne.
Their solicitor, John Devane said that his clients had an application to make, which they would address to the judge.
When the defendants began speaking,t he judge interrupted and asked the solictor to explain.
Mr. Devane explained that his clients were asking the judge to recuse himself from their case.
Mrs. Mustafa said that "with respect to the judge and the court, there is strong evidence by the judges own words that it would be unlikely for them to get a fair trial. You have indicated that you have no interest in hearing about Iraq or Shannon.
As our actions did not occur in a vacuum and our defense will refer to issues in Iraq and Shannon, logically we request that you recuse yourself from the case and allow a different judge to hear the case, - one who has not expressed such opinions about the issues"

This was a reference to a case last summer during which the Judge remarked "the less I hear about Iraq, the war and Shannon airport, the happier I will be"

The judge replied that the case did not involve the rights and wrongs of the war, rather the rights and wrongs of blocking traffic.

Mr. Devane, defending, said that his client's actions do have a legal defense as to lawful excuse, which has, as yet, received no legal recognition in Judge Mangan's court.

Mrs. Mustafa said that her actions did not occur in a vaccuum, and that the people who wrote the laws regarding the alleged offence, would not imagine them to be applied in a vacuum. she said that their defense will refer to events in Shannon and Iraq again and again.

Her husband, John Dunne, also addressed the court. "judge, you have already expressed you irritation with matters relating to Shannon and the war. Our defence directly refers to these matters. Before we even give our defence, we already know your opinion, as you yourself stated in plain english. With all due respect, we do not believ that we can receive a fair hearing before you, and we respectfully request that you recuse yourself"

their solicitor stated that "as Nuria is an Iraqi citizen, married to John, and with relatives living in Iraq, she is directly affected by the events occuring at Shannon and in Iraq."

the judge interrupted saying that, in the first of "these cases", on a date he did not recall, he had listened to 5-6 hours of testimony, much of it about iraq and that he had been commended for listening to it. He felt that this was false praise as the same people then disagreed with the conviction he handed down at the end of the case.

This raised a few eyebrows and court, and some comments were overheard that a judge should know better than to think he can avoid hearing testimony in one case simply because he had heard similar testimony in another case. Judges are required to treat new cases as separate, "blank slates".

The judge, now visibly irritated, refused to recuse himself, and told Mr. Devane that his clients can go to the High Court and ask them to disqualify him from hearing the case.

He let the case stand for a while while he dealt with the other defendants.

Eoin Rice, defending himself, explained that his solicitor was called away at short notice to a case in Dublin. Mr. Rice reminded the court that he had made an application to have a number of items returned to him.
These included a camera, a mini-disc player, and driving license which the State said that they would return to him. Mr. Rice said that he had only received his driving license but nothing else.

the judge told him to communicate with the Chief Superintendent in Ennis.

Inspector Kennedy said that the camera had been sent to the Garda Photographic unit in Dublin for analysis, but could not say when it would be returned.

Mr. Rice referred to an order for copies of relevant extracts from the arresting Gardai, which the State consented to.

the judge said he would adjourn the case for hearing pending the resolution of these issues.

Conor Cregan also made an application for extracts from Garda notebooks.
he asked for copies of notes made by Garda hayes and Detective Sgt. Moloney on Dec 6th, 24 hours before the arrest of Mr. Cregan.
The judge asked for an explanation.
Mr. Cregan explained that he had been followed by detectives on the nights of the 6th and 7th of December and that there was an agenda at work, and that the notebook extracts from Dec 6th would shine some light on this.

Inspector Kennedy consented to the request.
the judge asked him if he had any reservations about this.
Inspector Kennedy said that he had none.

the judge adjourned the cases and then raised the issue of bail.
The Prosecution had not raised any issue with the bail conditions, but the judge decided that he would now alter them.
He told Mr. Rice that he was imposing a ban, preventing Mr. Rice from entering the county of Clare other than to attend court.
Mr. Rice said that he would not accept this and that it would not be a lawful order.
The judge retorted that if Mr. Rice did not agree to these conditions, that he would remand Mr. Rice in custody.
Mr. Rice said that he would not accept the conditions, that they were beyond what the law would allow and that they were unconstitutional and a breach of his human rights.
Reference was made to the European Charter on Human Rights, which was enacted in irish Law on Dec 30 2003.
It prohibits arbitrary internal exile.
the judge instructed the Gardai to arrange for the imprisonment of Mr. Rice.
While reinforcements were summoned, and committal papers prepared, Mr. Cregan was called up.

the judge said that seeing as Mr. Creegan was living in Shannon, he would ban him from the airport. he asked Inspector Kennedy what distance he thought appropriate. (again it is worth noting that the prosecution was not initating these conditions but was merely acquiescing to the judge's whims)
inspector Kennedy said that perhaps the airport grounds would be sufficient.
Mr. Cregan pointed out that he was arrested in the town centre car park, and not at the airport.
The judge paused, and said that he would deal with this bail on the next hearing.

The judge then recalled Mrs Mustafa and Mr. Dunne.
He proposed banning them both from County Clare as part of their bail, and asked inspector Kennedy if he agreed.
Inspector Kennedy said that he did not think it would be necessary to impose conditions on these defendants.

It was obvious that the judge's sudden decision to increase the bail conditions arose from his injured pride.
It was interesting that he had decided to link Conor's arrest to the airport, when Conor had been arrested on a public order charge in the town centre, not at a protest.
But of course, the judge knew that Conor and Eoin were peace activists.

This judge has a personal bias against peace activists and has expressed it on many occassions, comparing them to paramilitary terrorists and saying that they hold themselves above the law.
If he is allowed to preside over any further cases of peace activists it will be a travesty as it is blatantly obvious that the judge has plenty of preconceived notions and cannot maintain his impartiality.

Eoin Rice is reported to be well and unrepentant in D-wing of Limerick Prison.
He is consulting with barristers and is seeking to have his commital quashed ahead of his next appearance before judge Mangan.