Brian Kearney Appeal Dismissed

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.

Crime gardai Policing

Brian Kearney Found Guilty

Let me begin this defence of our criminal justice system by telling you something:

I took the power lead of my Dyson cleaner, looped it over a door and made another loop for my foot. The cable carried my weight quite easily.

The police told the jury that a Dyson flex could not carry the weight of a human body for longer than 5 seconds.

What the police told the jury was wrong.

Let me continue with an observation on subliminal messages:

The media constantly referred to the victim as Siobhan, and to the accused as Kearney.

What picture does that create in your mind?

The judge in his summing up twice referred to Siobhan Kearney as Rachel. You might remember the recent controversial case of Rachel O Reilly who was in all likelihood brutally murdered by her husband. What predisposition did that Freudian slip create in the minds of the jury?

Listen. When are we going to start showing some respect for our own criminal justice system? When are we going to see that most probably guilty does not mean the same thing as guilty beyond reasonable doubt?

I think Brian Kearney probably killed his wife, but as I’ve said too many times already, we’re not supposed to be jailing people on the grounds of gross suspicion because when we start doing that we’ll have a police state.

Let the authorities do their job right, present a watertight case and put the likes of Brian Kearney and Joe O Reilly in jail based on proof. Or else let them go free.

The alternative is that every man accused of a violent crime stands convicted before his case ever comes to court.


Brian Kearney Murder Trial: RTÉ News reports


I’ve just got the news that the jury have returned a guilty verdict.  I think Brian kearney more than likely did commit murder, but I still think the conviction is unsafe, and I’ve explained why here:

Brian Kearney found guilty


I don’t know much about this case, and I don’t intend to say anything about the guilt or innocence of Brian Kearney, the man accused of murdering his wife, Siobhán Kearney. The evidence is still being presented in the case, and a jury will eventually decide.

All I want to ask is this:

What’s the appropriate way for RTÉ television news to refer to the people involved? Somehow, I don’t like the way they call the defendant “Mr Kearney”, while referring to the murder victim as “Siobhá¡n”.


What would be wrong with “Ms Kearney”? Or “Siobhán Kearney”?

After all, they’d never call the defendant “Brian”, now would they?