Robocop Trial – Press Images and Text

by ..... Tue Nov 16, 2004 15:50

GARDA CLEARED OF ASSAULTING THREE PROTESTORS DURING CITY CENTRE RALLY

Jury delivers unanimous verdict of not guilty after six-day hearing in Dublin court

A jury of eight women and four men have found Gda Donal Corcoran not guilty of striking three “Reclaim the Streets” protestors with his baton two years ago.

Some of his family and friends broke down in tears as the unanimous verdict of the jury was delivered in Dublin Circuit Criminal Court following deliberation of over two hears on day-six of the trail.

Gda Corcoran remained composed while the jury’s verdict was recorded. In evidence last week he told the jury that he knew people referred to him as “Robocop” and “Terminator”.

Gda Corcoran, of Mounjoy Gda Station, was unanimously found not guilty of all three counts of assault causing harm on May 6th 2002, to three people with Dublin addresses.

The garda thanked his counsel, Mr Patrick J. McCarthy SC (with Mr Breffini Gordon) and his solicitor before leaving court after he was discharged by Judge Yvonne Murphy.

Garda Corcoran agreed in evidence last Friday, he had struck Mr. Hayden on the head with his baton and used excessive force in dealing with him.

He said it was his intention to hit his outstretched arm in order to protect his garda colleague whom he believed Mr Hayden was about to punch.

He denied striking Ms Crean and Mr Breen.

Judge Murphy, in her charge to the jury, said there was two principal rights surrounding the trail: a citizen’s right to protest or march regardless of their point of view, and a garda’s right to do his or her job.

She said this was not a contest between Mr Hayden, Ms Crean and Mr Breen against Gda Corcoran; rather, it was a case brought by the State against him and these three people were merely witnesses in the trial. She further advised the jury to be impartial in its considerations.
Mr. McCarthy had urged the jury in his closing submission to consider the law of assault which, he said, allowed for assault when it occurred because of self defence.

He recalled that Gda Corcoran had told the jury in evidence he was acting in defence of a colleague when he struck Mr Hayden.

He told the jury they should put themselves “in the mind of the alleged assailant” to determine if Gda Corcoran was right in doing what he did.

He agreed with Mr Sean Gillane, prosecuting, that Ms Crean presented as an open, honest and candid witness, but he warned the jury to consider she was mistaken in her identity of Gda Corcoran as her assailant.

Mr McCarthy said there was a serious state of confusion at the time and his client was one of 20 gardai who ere in the line directly behind her.

Mr McCarthy said Mr Breen gave a “welter of conflicting evidence” and he asked the jury to consider it did not surmount to a sufficient level to convict his client on this count.

He also said that there was a weakness in Mr Breen’s identification and that his evidence in court contradicted that given in his statement.

Mr McCarthy concluded that Gda Corcoran did not have a high level of experience and was relatively junior.

He further said that his client was not prepared for his duties that day and, because of a lack of management on the day, was thrown into the situation.

Earlier, Mr Gillane (with Mr Tom O’Connell SC) said, in his closing statement for the prosecution, there were three trails that need to be considered in this case.

He said everyone was in agreement that Mr Hayden was struck by Gda Corcoran, but the question was why? Mr Gillane said Gda Corcoran claimed it was in defence of a colleague and that Mr Hayden was acting in an aggressive manner towards gardai.

He suggested that Mr Hayden was plucked from the crowd and struck from behind and deliberately so.

“Mr Hayden did not even so much as lay an eyeball on the garda who struck him,” he said.

Mr Gillane said Ms Crean’s honesty was immediately obvious and had not over-emphasised her situation, stating she was not in need of medical attention as a result of receiving a baton blow. She was looking behind and she saw who struck her.

Mr Gillane said everyone was in agreement Ms Crean had been struck, but the question was by who?

Mr Gillane described Mr Breen as a “colourful witness”. He said Mr Breen had admitted that other gardai hit him, but he remembered Gda Corcoran as hitting him as he was the one who hit the first blow.

Counsel said the question in relation to Mr Breen again was who hit him and indeed where they hit him?

Mr Gillane advised the jury not to decide the case on the basis of prejudice or sympathy they might have for either protestors or gardai. They should leave all sentiments outside the door.

GARDA BODY IS “PROUD” OF ACQUITTED OFFICER –by Conor Lally

The largest Garda association has said it is “very proud” of Gda Donal Corcoran, following his acquittal on assault charges yesterday.

The Garda Representative Association which represents almost 10,000 gardai, said it was “very pleased” with the verdict. The association’s president, Mr Dermot O’Donnell, said his organisation was “very proud” of the manner in which Garda Corcoran had behaved, saying he had conducted himself in an “honest, professional and forthright manner”.

“If there are shortcomings that can be identified from this then they need to be addressed and changes implemented, and then we need to move on. The Garda Commissioner has a role in that, as does the Minister for Justice and ourselves.

“It is in every stake holder’s interest that any shortcomings, if identified, should be addressed”.

Mr O’Donnell said the trail had been a “challenging experience on many levels “for Gda Corcoran and his family. However, he had been found not guilty by a unanimous verdict by a jury of his peers.

The trail demonstrated that Garda Corcoran had been confronted with an “extremely difficult” situation in policing the “Reclaim the Streets” protest in 2002.

He added the force had not been damaged in the eyes of the public following the protest. “Who gauges public opinion really? I think there are many ways you can look at it. If you look at the members of the public, helping to bring people to justice, that has not fallen off.

“You can try and judge public opinion using all kinds of polls, but on the operational side the calls from the public have not fallen off and that is what I would look to to measure public opinion. Most people realise that An Garda Siochana are honest people who are willing to go the extra mile to get the job done”.

by ..... Tue Nov 16, 2004 15:53

GARDA CLEARED OF STRIKING TRIO

Officer “defended colleague” – By Sonya McLean

A Garda has been found not guilty of striking three “Reclaim the Streets” protestors with his baton more than two years ago.

A unanimous jury found Garda Donal Corcoran of Mountjoy Garda Station, not guilty of all three counts of assault causing harm to Oisin Breen of Butterfield Park, Rathfarnham; Katie Crean of New Cabra Road, Dublin; and Brian Hayden Knockmore Grove, Tallaght on May 6, 2002.

His family and friends broke down in tears as the verdict was delivered in Dublin Circuit Criminal Court before Judge Yvonne Murphy following deliberations hours on day six of the trail.

Gda Corcoran has agreed in evidence last Friday that he had struck Mr Hayden on the head with his baton and used excessive force in dealing with him.

He said it was his intention to hit his outstretched arm in order to protect his garda colleague whom he believed Mr Hayden was about to punch.

He denied striking Ms Crean and Mr Breen and told the jury he knew people referred to him as “Robocop” and “Terminator”.

Judge Murphy, in her charge to the jury, said there were two main principal rights surround the trail: a citizen’s right to protest or March regardless of their point of view, and a garda’s right to do his or her job.

She said this was not a contest between Mr Hayden, Ms Crean and Mr Breen against Gda Corcoran; rather, it was a case brought by the State against him and these three people were merely witnesses in the trial. She further advised the jury to be impartial. Gda Corcoran’s counsel, Patrick J McCarthy, had urged the jury in his submission to consider the law of assault which he said allowed for assault when it occurred because of self-defence.

He recalled that Gda Corcoran had told the jury in evidence he was acting in defence of a colleague when he struck Mr Hayden.

He advised the jury it must decide if there was a reasonable possibility that in Gda Corcoran’s state of mind at the time his actions were justifiable.

He agreed with prosecution Sean Gillane, BL, that Ms Crean presented as open and honest witness, but he warned the jury to consider she was mistaken in her identity of Gda Corcoran as her assailant.

Mr McCarthy said there was a serious state of confusion at the time and his client was one of 20 gardai who were in the line directly behind her.

Mr McCarthy said Mr Breen gave a “welter of conflicting evidence” and he asked the jury to consider if it was sufficient to convict his client on this count.

He also said there was a weakness in Mr Breen’s identification and that his evidence in court contradicted that given in his statement.

Mr McCarthy concluded that Gda Corcoran did not have a high level of experience and was relatively junior. He further said that his client was not prepared for his duties that day. Because of a lack of management, he had been thrown into the situation.

Earlier, Mr Gillane said in his closing statement that there were three trials which needed to be considered in the case. He said everyone was in agreement that Mr Hayden was acting in an aggressive manner towards gardai.

He suggested Mr Hayden was plucked from the crowd and struck from behind and deliberately so.

“Mr Hayden did not even so much as lay an eyeball on the garda who struck him”, he said.

Mr Gillane said Ms Crean was looking behind her and she saw who struck her. Mr Gillane said everyone was in agreement that Ms Crean had been struck, but the question was by who?

He said Mr Breen had admitted that other gardai hit him but be remembered Gda Corcoran hitting him as he was the one who had struck the first blow. Counsel said the question in relation to Mr Breen again was, who hit him?

by ..... Tue Nov 16, 2004 15:56

ROBOCOP CASE GARDA CLEARED OF MAY DAY STREET ASSAULT – Irish Examiner – By Sean McCarthaigh

The Garda dubbed Robocop after being filmed striking out at protesters with his baton during the May Day riot in 2002 was yesterday acquitted of assaulting three students.

A jury of eight women and four men at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court found Gda Donal Corcoran not guilty on three counts of assault causing harm. The verdict means that four out of seven gardai charged with offences relating to the riot – which broke out a the end of an anti-globalisation march and resulted in injuries to around 20 demonstrators – have been cleared of any criminal activity.

Two more gardai who were on duty during the Dame Street riot are expected to face a retrial after a jury failed to reach a verdict in an earlier case this year. Another garda has still to face similar charges before Dublin District Court.

Yesterday’s verdict on each charge of assault on the demonstrators Oisin Breen, Katie Crean and Brian Hayden, all from Dublin was unanimous.

Gda Corcoran, aged 30, who come originally from Churchtown, Dublin, but is now living in Clonee, Co Meath, was nicknamed “Robocop” and “Terminator” after he was clearly identified in video footage striking out with baton.

During the six-day trail, the 6ft 4in garda claimed he had acted in self-defence as he believed he and his colleagues were being attacked. He admitted hitting Mr Hayden, although he insisted that he had not intended to deliberately injure the protestor or strike him on the head.

Dressed in a dark suit, the accused sat nervously as the jury returned to Court Number 29 yesterday afternoon after just two and half hours. He remained largely impassive as the forewoman of the jury announced he had been found not guilty on all charges until Judge Yvonne Murphy advised him that he was free to go. Gda Corcoran stood up and winked in the direction of friends in the body of the courtroom. They included his mother, who broke down crying in relief at the verdict.

Gda Corcoran, who has been assigned to desk duty since the incident, faced possible discharge from the force if he had convicted. However, he is now expected to resume duties as Ethnic Liaison Officer at Mountjoy Garda station.

Gda Corcoran and Ms Crean, the only alleged victim to be present in court, declined to comment.

However, the president of the Gda Rep Assoc. Dermott O’Donnell, called for an examination of the garda operation on May Day 2002 as “lessons have to be learnt”.

During the trail, evidence was heard that there was no garda plan in place that day for policing the protest.

by . Tue Nov 16, 2004 15:56

was edited.

by ..... Tue Nov 16, 2004 15:58

...

by ..... Tue Nov 16, 2004 16:01

...

by a poor shocked innocent Tue Nov 16, 2004 17:26

Thank god he didn't get off, then i'd have to reassess the opinion i formed on that day that the gardai were a bunch of untouchable paramilitiary shits. Up until then i had a fairly rosy opinion of our lovely friendly gardai having had trouble with american cops while off on that J1 thing, thank god the gardai aren't like that i naievely thought. That mayday utterly changed my opinion when i saw them behave in such a disgraceful manner, no matter what the trolls say the gardai were acting in an illegal manner and chaotic manner while individuals under the nose of their superiors were clearly going beyond their powers merely to apprehend as they dealt out their summary judgement. There was no threat from the crowd and sure everyone would have gotten bored and gone home eventually had they not ignited the situation.

The fact that the lot of them got off is a disgrace and shows a judiciary out of touch and with no understanding of the importance of retaining the public's belief in police accountability. Why should anyone present on the day trust a garda again or believe in the judical system, but hey im not about to scandalise the court here, but i believe i should have the freedom to do so. It is only a reaction to such a one sided stance that a whole new generation has been polarised against the police and believe in frustrating them (completely within legal boundaries of course) at every turn when we encounter them. Respect is only given to those who earn it and if the gardai are allowed disgrace themselves in this manner why should one feel obliged to respect them. This is a problem that neither the judiciary nor the government seems to understand and no amount of stunted and useless pr from the garda press office can solve.

What is interesting is the more senior members of the gardai present at the scene who ignored what they saw and the reports of passersby and victims. As Carney J remarked in DPP v Bartley "where a credible complaint of felony is made to a policeman, he has no discretion under the common law not to investigate it and apprehend a named offender. A failure to carry out his duty vigourously constitutes an illegality on the policeman's part and renders him liable to prosecution and indictment" but hey good luck trying to get any justice.

Its going to take a lot to convince me to trust them as our guardians of the peace again, as it is i treat them like any other service provider, they have their uses but like all companies where individuals are unaccountable you can never turn your back on them, they are not really their to serve the public but to serve themselves, its about careers and the company's image and defending those things too vociferously alienates those on the outside. No wonder the Gardai want non lethal weapons when they have done such a good job of turning many sections of society against them.

I know that this opinion is deeply flawed and i have to question it every time i meet the local guard, but no amount of friendly individuals can convince me that there is no institutional malaise. I know a lot of gardai do a good and important job and are occasionally faced with danger but hey so do builders and fishermen more of whom die every year without being protected disproportionally for their dangerous lives.

Quite frankly i wish i did still trust the gardai, or more correctly i wish the gardai were still worthy of my trust. Hopefully i will trust them again but with their record at ignoring public opinion i doubt it. That's my two cents.

by Michael Tue Nov 16, 2004 18:25

What's all this moaning about the gardai being above the law? A cop was brought before a jury, not by a Common Informer, but by the DPP. He got off because the jury let him off, because they thought what he did (smashing people's skulls with a stick) wasn't assault, or if it was, that it was excusable because the people he beat up may have seemed to him like they might have tried to hit another cop.

Let's see now... if he had pushed them back with an open hand shouting "Get back!" you might say "Yep, that's fair". But this robocop beat the shit out of someone. Is that really proportionate? Is that a measured response to the perceived situation?

Nice work jury. You've done your jobs well. You've made Ireland a much safer place for everyone.

by ren Wed Nov 17, 2004 00:52

I noticed with one of the previous cases that a Garda got off when he admits hitting the wrong people in retaliatation for a blow he recieved earlier, now if this was you or me in the pub the doctrine of transferred malice would nail us. I dont fully see how such obvious things can be ignored or are people hiring crap barristers and are courts forgetting about precedent when it suits them, as for the jury in this case, i dont think it deserves comment when they let someone like this off, was it because he said he was sorry and sure the poor fella was living in his personal hell because it had been preying on his mind ever since, can i be let off that speeding ticket because i feel stupid for being caught in the act, hopefully these cases will result in some legal debate thats published where everyone can find it. I tell you browsing downstairs in easons is as much fun as trying to save computer game cheats on your phone up at the magazines, what a service they provide.

by stay safe Wed Nov 17, 2004 01:19

What did people expect? The jury were not going to put themselves and their livelihoods at risk. you can be sure that if they had convicted they themselves would be victimised by the guards. The force looks after its own, and they have long memories.

by Steve - For myself Wed Nov 17, 2004 10:04 steve.kudlak at cruzrights dot org POBX 2005 Watsonville, CA 95077-2005 (831)457-9754 x2571

Gack, that sounds pretty hideous. Of course John Young of Cryptime has a lot fun publishing poixs of the Gardai Undercover folks.

After seeing all these American Programs where
most of the actors protraying forensics experts have
intensely attractive bodies ....I mean some one now
coroners with nice legs ands well muscled male lab
techs....giiggle...It was nice to see pictures of people
in public service that look like normal humans.
In spite of all the James Bond stuff having a beautiful and memorable body might be a disadvantage in undercover work.

Have Fun,
Sends Steve

by Typical Shite Wed Nov 17, 2004 12:21

I'm glad he got off not because what he did was right but becuase it shows up certain people for what they really are.

On Indymedia you get people bemoaning everything. The relaity here is that the guy was charged, and tried and aquitted. The legal system in operation. You cant have it everyway you want I mean crying for democracy but when its in operation crying because you didnt get the result you wanted.

I was in Shannon at the protest last week and was apalled to see MAry Kelly giving out to the assembled crowd for not doing more!! What a motivating factor, we were there is that not enough. We got tracked by the cops, numbers taken of cars etc we were there because of our belief in the cause and yet she gives out to us. Another case of wrong priorities

Wake up people you cant have it both ways.... if you want a democracy then you live with the good and the bad

by ooooh Wed Nov 17, 2004 14:35

So you were at shannon, and you disagree with mary kelly, that does not mean you were on dame street and witnessed the actions of the gardai on that occasion. Two completely seperate incidents that you seem to believe are exactly the same. One is a protest against the war the other was a protest about the use of public space, the context of the protest was entirely different.

As for democracy, it needs an accountable police force which is independent from political bias so that all people can have faith in it. Lots of people come on here saying its democracy whenever democracy gets trodden on in the hope that saying such an emotive word without questioning its meaning will make anyone who questions authority seem like some sort of crazed revolutionary. This issue is not so much about whether you agree with the politics or actions of protestors but whether you believe that those who uphold the law should abide by the very laws they claim to embody.

by typical shite Wed Nov 17, 2004 14:45

I was actually there in dame street, and if you noticed I did say i didnt agree that his actions were right.

My problem is with people like you who have this holyier than thou attitude and the relaity is that he was accountable, accountable to the court and the jury. You cant cry because you dont agree with the jury, they are ordinary citizens who made their mind up on the evidence before them.

My point in highlighting the shannon (mary kelly) case was that in both occassions people like you are crying because they didnt get the reult they wanted, the jury was biased, the law is an ass, the whole fucking country is wrong, wake up and smell the coffee,

1) no one gives a shit about what happened on dame street- i know when I tell people they just say well ye deserved it

2) no one gives a shit about shannon - 120 people turned up- we protested to the cops about their numbers and his reply was "maybe thats a reflection on you rather than us"

Thats the issue, its nuts like you who fuck things up because you whine and moan about everything and call jurors stupid because they cant see the real evidence, etc etc etc

Its time you lot woke up and realised that nothing will change until people like mary kelly , richard b barrett and you fuck off and let real people not wannabee politicans try and get things done.

by R. Isible Wed Nov 17, 2004 19:44

You entitle your comment "typical shite" and I have to agree with you. It's interesting that you draw a link between Mary Kelly and the Police Riot and Assault at RTS.

In both cases the judicial process has been shown to be completely skewed by the selection and editing of evidence. In Mary Kelly's trial the jury wasn't allowed to hear testimony (from people like former US Attorney General Ramsey Clarke, ex-UN administrator Dennis Halliday etc which would have provided convincing proof to the jury that an international crime against humanity was occuring). In the RTS case evidence was hidden from the jury that showed that the Gardai were engaged in a riot.

Go look at the Indymedia footage which has now been verified by hostile forensic experts as being genuine and unimpeachable beyond a shadow of a doubt and tell me that you wouldn't convict. If I'd been on the jury then he'd be in the joy right now.

I doubt any Garda with an ounce of cop views this as a victory. It's done them even more damage as it's now been shown that justice is not obtainable through regular channels.

Just out of interest I note that this is the State prosecuting the State. Who were the prosecuting and defending counsels? Who paid for Corcoran's defence? What is the consensus among legal circles about the relative merits of the defence and prosecution teams?

Link Video and Pictures of Gardai beating the crap out of women, kids and peaceful young men (bear in mind as you watch this that these are the same feckers that are responsible for failing to stop the appalling number of deaths on the road due to speeding): http://www.indymedia.ie/newswire.php?id=4047

by Tony Wed Nov 17, 2004 21:31

Quote: What is the consensus among legal circles about the relative merits of the defence and prosecution teams?



It's the same as the asylum system Riso. The consent amongst the legal circus can be summed up in two words:

Chi Ching.

by Reality Bites Fri Nov 19, 2004 11:01

this was a major operation to save poor Donal's tender white ass

The state has looked after its faithful boot-boy very efficiently

Promotion will rapidly follow, thanks to all the positive headlines from the jackal press all lined up by GRA to spin it as a "victory for justice"

People whose heads were not entirely cracked will perhaps now stop relying on the paternal all-in-your-best-interests State to nail this character and start pursuing the civil route for assault and damages - the standard of proof threshhold is 50.1%

by amanda Mon Nov 22, 2004 20:53

The video evidence shows that Donal Corcoran was involved in more than 3 assaults. Hundreds of people were witness to this. Yet only 3 people came forward to give evidence of being assaulted. Of those 3 only 1 was filmed being assaulted, for the other 2 it was a case of their word against his. Where were all the others who can be seen on camera either being assaulted, or witnessing the assaults. Perhaps if a few more of those had come forward the result would have been different.
It wasn't much fun for those who did come forward, sure. Being called to the witness stand, having their characters and lives attacked by the defence. Those with video evidence endangered their livlihoods due to the fact that they have had to give over so much of their time to these cases. (there has been 4, there may be 3 more). They have been filmed, photographed and had their words broadcast by the nations media, so everyone in the country can form opinions on them, and then they have been made to look like either liars or fools.
Maybe even if everyone came forward nothing would have changed. I think many people in this country are just not able to get their heads round the idea of convicting a guard (I may be wrong but I think it is a little paranoid to believe the jury were afraid of garda reprisals). But maybe it would have made a big difference. The jury could have seen the complete footage of the assaults instead of just 1 incident, The fact that so many people couldn't have the courage of their convictions and come forward is a big reason that Corcoran and 3 of his colleages have been acquited.

by karl Mon Nov 22, 2004 22:29

who didn't come forward, in the general sense...

by amanda Tue Nov 23, 2004 23:14

The vast majority of people there. Anyone who was assualted by Corcoran or witnessed him assualting anyone and didn't come forward to the dpp helped him get off.

by unknown Sat Apr 09, 2005 16:38

how can this lunk head claim he was acting in 'self defence'?... would YOU try and attack this guy?!

by Admirer Sat Apr 09, 2005 18:33

Donal does have a mouth like a rose bud. Probably that's what got him off.

by Warren Sun Apr 10, 2005 11:59

He's quite a peachy looking big dish. Even though he's a pig, he could give me a whopping with his love truncheon any day. Mmmm, the big brute.

by Al Mon Apr 11, 2005 01:15

I cant believe some of the things Im reading here. Just how far will people go to continue their own denial?
1. The state does not, did not and will not provide any defence or funding for defence to a Garda on trial, that includes being sued in the civil courts.
2. "from people like former US Attorney General Ramsey Clarke, ex-UN administrator Dennis Halliday etc which would have provided convincing proof to the jury that an international crime against humanity was occuring" - Completely irelivent to the case. If I assault someone and provide witnesses to say that that person had previously beaten up my friend does that excuse my actions? No!
3. The press are hardly pro-Garda, how can anyone say that? They are begging for a Guard to do something they can splash all over the frontpage.
4. I shouldnt dignify the comments made about Jury intimidation but I will. What planet are you on? Another Garda has been found guilty of assault, apparantly we didnt lean on that jury enough.

This arguement is typical and believe it or not Guards do it as well. We moan and complain when the decisions dont go our way but guess what? thats justice. People are found innocent all the time in court but the Gardai dont winge and moan, they get on with their jobs. Mind you that shouldnt happen seeing as we lean on juries.