Roscommon farmer has appeal rejected over false statement to gardaí about missing cattle

High Court Reporters

A Roscommon farmer who made a false statement to gardaí that his cattle were missing when they were actually in his neighbour's shed has failed in a bid to have the Supreme Court hear an appeal against his conviction and fine.

Gerard Harrington of Marian Road, Boyle, Co Roscommon, was convicted in July 2021 at Tullamore Circuit Criminal Court of making a false report or statement tending to give rise to apprehension for the safety of persons or property. He was sentenced in October 2021 and fined €6,500.

In October 2015, Harrington reported to gardaí that a number of his cattle were missing and gave details of the breed, tag number and value of each.

After making enquiries, gardaí were led to a shed at Breedogue, Co Roscommon, where they found a number of cattle, six of which had tag numbers matching those reported missing by Harrington.

Last May at the Court of Appeal, Harrington, then 52, complained that the trial judge erred in ruling admissible a Garda interview, with his legal counsel submitting that the appellant had been “inveigled” to attend the Garda station in a manner that prevented him from having the opportunity to get legal advice.

“There was not a scintilla of evidence to support the suggestion that the appellant had been tricked or trapped in any way,” said Court of Appeal judge Mr Justice John Edwards in dismissing the appeal.

Harrington had submitted 81 grounds of appeal, 34 of which he pressed at the appeal court, including a claim that the jury were subject to “oppressive conditions” due to hot weather.

Harrington then sought to have his case heard by the Supreme Court, who last week published a determination rejecting the application, finding that Harrington had not met the constitutional bar to have his appeal heard before them.

The Supreme Court noted it was suggested that Harrington’s motivation for the false report arose after a local woman collided with a cow or a bull a few evenings before Harrington said the cattle had gone missing.

The Supreme Court ruled that Harrington agreed before the jury that he had not been arrested and had been told that he was not obliged to answer questions.

The ruling states that Harrington confirmed that the memorandum contained his account of what he said had happened. Harrington argued, however, that he should have been arrested so that he would have had access to legal advice.

The Supreme Court said the issue raised was concerning compliance with the requirements of an EU directive on the rights of a person giving a voluntary interview in respect of both legal advice and the recordings of interviews.

The Supreme Court found that Harrington did not make admissions at any stage of the interview and insisted that his account, as recorded in the memorandum, was true.

"Nothing in the case turned upon its provisions given that no admissions were made, and the interview content was consistent with the case made at trial," the court ruled in dismissing the application.