Jury in Satchwell trial told to approach case ‘with open mind, without emotion’

By Gráinne Ní Aodha, PA

The jury in the trial of a man accused of murdering his wife have been told to approach the case “with an open mind” and “without emotion”.

The judge said to jurors that they should not think “less” of the accused because he did not take the stand to give evidence.

Richard Satchwell, of Grattan Street in Youghal, is accused of murdering his wife between March 19th and 20th, 2017.

The 58-year-old, who is originally from Leicester, England, denies the charge at the Central Criminal Court in Dublin.

Tina Satchwell’s remains were found under the stairs in the living room of their Co Cork home in October 2023, six years after Mr Satchwell reported her missing.

At the Central Criminal Court on Monday, Mr Justice Paul McDermott told the seven women and five men of the jury that aspects of the trial have been “unseemly, perhaps shocking”.

But he said if parts of the trial raised their indignation, “you have to put those things outside the door” and approach it in a “very careful clinical way”.

“You have to approach it with an open mind, with an independent mind, without emotion, without prejudice,” he said.

Mr Justice McDermott said that they were making their determination based on proof beyond reasonable doubt, which he described as higher than probable, but not “a mathematical certainty”.

He described it as similar to making a major life decision where a lot of aspects are weighed up, and where something may cause them to hesitate in making the decision.

He described reasonable doubt as when something in the evidence presented in court causes them to pause, or if they feel there is “something missing”.

“It’s not a mathematical certainty, it’s not an impossible standard, it’s certainly a high standard.”

He said there was no burden on an accused to prove their innocence, and the presumption of innocence is maintained “unless and until you determine he is guilty of an offence”.

“You know that Mr Satchwell has not given evidence in the case, there is no obligation” to do so, he told the jury.

“He is entitled not to give evidence and you shouldn’t think any less of him because he exercised his right.”

Mr Justice McDermott said he would summarise some of the evidence in the case for the jury.

He said if the jury disagrees with the emphasis he places on certain evidence, or if they feel he left out something “that you think is terribly important”, “that’s fine”.