Brian Kearney’s appeal against his conviction for the murder of his wife, Siobhán, was dismissed today by the Court of Criminal Appeal.
His legal team said that the State had relied on subjective evidence, and that the court had not taken into account the possibility that somebody else had committed the murder, but the appeal court refused to accept these points.
You might remember at the time of Brian Kearney’s original conviction, I was worried about the way the evidence was presented. I felt that he had probably committed the murder, but that it wasn’t good enough to convict somebody on the balance of probabilities. I thought at the time that the State should have done a better job of collecting evidence and preparing a sound, logical and watertight case against him.
I also didn’t like the way the trial judge referred to the defendant as Kearney and to his wife as Siobhán when he addressed the jury. At one point, he even referred to her as Rachel, echoing another brutal murder case. I think this verbal body-language sent unnecessary subliminal messages to the jury.
I haven’t changed my opinion on the case.
Although I think Brian Kearney should probably have been convicted, I don’t believe the charge against him was proven, and that’s bad for justice in this country.