Regency Hotel shooting trial collapses following Detective Superintendent's suicide

paw patrol

Garda PR game has started - colm fox was now under huge pressure painting him as a victim.

I find this startling as we have been force fed how experienced he was in these matters.
Also gangland crime has a poor success rate in convicting people , if he followed the plan and nobody was tried or jailed then so be it, sometimes the evidence isn't there. Being such an experienced garda this would be standard fare to him and his superiors.


something is afoot here.
Whether it's garda corruption or even worse collusion with organised crime remains to be seen.

Calltocall

The other point to make is that the man could have been suffering from a mental illness which he hid and then combined with the stress of work/the trial, if he knew it was going to collapse, pushed him over the edge. On the outside looking in it may appear to be not enough to take your own life but when you live through extreme stress for a prolonged period it doesn’t take much for someone to snap, mental illness can effect anyone regardless of profession.

MrFresh

odyssey06 wrote: »

Plus, what could be so compromising in the notes and USB stick.
If there was a deliberate attempt to frame a suspect you would hardly put it down in your notes in an incriminating manner and leave a trail of evidence to it.
If the notes incriminated him but he only realised it after the fact it would be a huge mistake but as you say, not the first and note the last.

There's no suggestion the Ak47 was planted on Hutch, so, maybe I've seen too much TV, but would a cop be too bothered about a gang member's innocence on exact charges with stone wall evidence of serious criminality like that?

He would have to have really taken it to heart re: that mistake causing the collapse of one of the biggest trials in the history of the state.

Unless there's something much murkier going on...

Those gangsters don't retire when they get away with a crime. He'd have just been focused on for the future crimes. There's nothing to indicate he was overly invested in the case.

paw patrol wrote: »

Garda PR game has started - colm fox was now under huge pressure painting him as a victim.

I find this startling as we have been force fed how experienced he was in these matters.
Also gangland crime as a poor success rate in convicting people , if he followed the plan and nobody was tried or jailed then so be it, sometimes the evidence isn't there. Being such an experienced garda this would be standard fare to him and his superiors.


something is afoot here.
Whether it's garda corruption or even worse collusion with organised crime remains to be seen.

So you've completely ruled out any possibility that he is just one of the hundreds of people every year, mostly men, who find life to be too much? And you've completely discounted the fact that Garda suicide rates are about six times the national average.

Chiparus

I wonder is there evidence that there was a common practice to collude in the identification of suspects on CCTV? Could other cases be similarly tainted?

If so, I expect this will be buried.

odyssey06

MrFresh wrote: »

Those gangsters don't retire when they get away with a crime. He'd have just been focused on for the future crimes. There's nothing to indicate he was overly invested in the case...
So you've completely ruled out any possibility that he is just one of the hundreds of people every year, mostly men, who find life to be too much? And you've completely discounted the fact that Garda suicide rates are about six times the national average.

Completely ruled out no, but how many of those Gardai left suicide notes that cause the collapse of trials? That suggests it was more than just finding life too much. There was a specific angle to the trial.

Also, Garda suicide rates being 6 times the national average could be distorted somewhat by having a demographic 'bulge' in the gender and age profile at highest risk.
That said, Colm Fox was in one of the highest risk profile, middle aged men.

MrFresh

odyssey06 wrote: »

Completely ruled out no, but how many of those Gardai left suicide notes that cause the collapse of trials? That suggests it was more than just finding life too much. There was a specific angle to the trial.

Also, Garda suicide rates being 6 times the national average could be distorted somewhat by having a demographic 'bulge' in the gender and age profile at highest risk.
That said, Colm Fox was in one of the highest risk profile, middle aged men.

Where are you getting the idea his suicide note collapsed the trial and not simply his death in itself?

hatrickpatrick

MrFresh wrote: »

Where are you getting the idea his suicide note collapsed the trial and not simply his death in itself?

It was widely reported in the media at the time that the notes he wrote pertained directly to the trial and presented "unprecedented conundrums" which would have to be sorted out (the trial judge's own words). He then adjourned the trial while GSOC examined the notes and the circumstances around his death, including seizing electronic devices which had belonged to him and some of his colleagues.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/regency-trial-adjourned-after-late-investigating-detective-s-notes-handed-in-1.3401701

It's very clear that this pertained directly to the detective's notes.

The Regency Hotel shooting trial has been adjourned for a month to allow the completion of an investigation into the circumstances of the death of Detective Supt Colm Fox, who had been the lead investigator into the fatal shooting.

Notes written by the late garda were handed into the Special Criminal Court on Thursday and read by the three judges.

The trial had been adjourned on Monday after the non-jury court heard that material in the case had presented some “unprecedented conundrums”.

This was after an earlier adjournment, almost two weeks ago, when the defence requested to be provided with copies of emails exchanged between four gardaí involved in the case.

And

Prosecuting counsel Seán Gillane SC on Thursday asked the court to receive and read some material, which was not opened to the court. This material was “notes authored by the late superintendent”.

Mr Gillane said these would “provide context” for the court regarding an application he would make. The court rose and the three judges read the notes.

When the judges returned, Mr Gillane said there was a separate investigation ongoing into the “circumstances of Colm Fox’s passing”.

“It’s felt having considered the matter carefully, it would be safer from everyone’s perspective to allow the investigation be completed before the trial will proceed,” he said.

Mr Gillane added that an adjournment seemed to be the “safest path forward, to make sure no-one is taken by surprise by anything”.

Michael O’Higgins SC, for Mr Hutch, said he had no objection to the trial being adjourned. Previously, he told the court the defence would be applying to have the trial “adjourned outright”.

Subsequently:

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/end-is-in-sight-for-inquiry-into-death-of-lead-garda-in-regency-case-court-hears-37277327.html

Det Supt Fox died in February this year while the trial was in progress. The defence has since been given a copy of an interim report on the investigation into his death and the court was today told about progress being made on analyses of a mobile phone, laptop computer and two USB devices.

This morning, prosecutor Sean Gillane said an end to "the IT end of the investgation" was in sight. One of the devices had been accessed and it generated a "fairly significant amount of material."

Further examination of e-mails had been done and that analysis was near completion, he said.

Why would they go to such lengths to break into electronic devices and recover data from them in this way if the suicide note wasn't directly relevant to the trial? Occam's Razor suggests that he wrote something very explosive or at least out of left field which threw the whole trial into chaos. GSOC then analysed his electronics and those of some of his colleagues, prepared a report on what they found during that investigation, and it was on foot of this report that the trial collapsed.

It's very obvious at least to me that there's far, far more to this case than a Garda merely being overworked, and a trial stalling simply because he happened to be the lead investigator. Any speculation which does not tie these events together intrinsically is in my view a far more complicated and unlikely explanation than the obvious one - that this entire sequence of events was linked. The trial being adjourned over the photo identification, the photo being ruled admissible, the superintendent taking his own life less than a week later, and the trial subsequently collapsing on foot of his notes and an analysis of his and his colleagues communications.

Unless there are other major elements here which have not been disclosed to the public, it seems like a very obvious logical conclusion that the above described sequence of events occured as a chain of cause and effect, not as individual events which just happened to occur in that order, in that time period. Something he wrote led to the judge getting spooked and adjourning the trial to wait for GSOC's analysis. Something GSOC found led them to delve deep into his electronic devices, and something they found during that investigation irreparably damaged the prosecution's case against Patrick Hutch.

MrFresh

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

It was widely reported in the media at the time that the notes he wrote pertained directly to the trial and presented "unprecedented conundrums" which would have to be sorted out (the trial judge's own words). He then adjourned the trial while GSOC examined the notes and the circumstances around his death, including seizing electronic devices which had belonged to him and some of his colleagues.

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/regency-trial-adjourned-after-late-investigating-detective-s-notes-handed-in-1.3401701

It's very clear that this pertained directly to the detective's notes.



And



Subsequently:

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/end-is-in-sight-for-inquiry-into-death-of-lead-garda-in-regency-case-court-hears-37277327.html



Why would they go to such lengths to break into electronic devices and recover data from them in this way if the suicide note wasn't directly relevant to the trial? Occam's Razor suggests that he wrote something very explosive or at least out of left field which threw the whole trial into chaos. GSOC then analysed his electronics and those of some of his colleagues, prepared a report on what they found during that investigation, and it was on foot of this report that the trial collapsed.

It's very obvious at least to me that there's far, far more to this case than a Garda merely being overworked, and a trial stalling simply because he happened to be the lead investigator. Any speculation which does not tie these events together intrinsically is in my view a far more complicated and unlikely explanation than the obvious one - that this entire sequence of events was linked. The trial being adjourned over the photo identification, the photo being ruled admissible, the superintendent taking his own life less than a week later, and the trial subsequently collapsing on foot of his notes and an analysis of his and his colleagues communications.

Unless there are other major elements here which have not been disclosed to the public, it seems like a very obvious logical conclusion that the above described sequence of events occured as a chain of cause and effect, not as individual events which just happened to occur in that order, in that time period. Something he wrote led to the judge getting spooked and adjourning the trial to wait for GSOC's analysis. Something GSOC found led them to delve deep into his electronic devices, and something they found during that investigation irreparably damaged the prosecution's case against Patrick Hutch.

So Occam's Razor is your smoking gun? You're making your own story out of little to no actual facts. Of course there are major elements that have not been disclosed to the public. Practically nothing has.

hatrickpatrick

MrFresh wrote: »

So Occam's Razor is your smoking gun? You're making your own story out of little to no actual facts. Of course there are major elements that have not been disclosed to the public. Practically nothing has.

Well what do you regard as a more likely explanation given everything I've posted above from news articles written at the time of the events occurring (as opposed to summaries written this week)? Do you reckon that the series of events directly related to the defence's case in this trial happened one after the other and in close proximity to eachother, entirely by chance?

Why would the GSOC report be relevant to the trial and why would it be immediately after its presentation to both legal teams that the charges would be dropped, unless it's directly related?

Correlation isn't causation, but there's a lot of correlation going on here.

MrFresh

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Well what do you regard as a more likely explanation given everything I've posted above from news articles written at the time of the events occurring (as opposed to summaries written this week)? Do you reckon that the series of events directly related to the defence's case in this trial happened one after the other and in close proximity to eachother, entirely by chance?

Why would the GSOC report be relevant to the trial and why would it be immediately after its presentation to both legal teams that the charges would be dropped, unless it's directly related?

Correlation isn't causation, but there's a lot of correlation going on here.

GSOC's report is relevant because it's an investigation into the death of a primary witness. You're assuming that the case collapsed because of something in the report. But it could just have easily been something else and they held out for the GSOC report for procedural reasons.

odyssey06

MrFresh wrote: »

GSOC's report is relevant because it's an investigation into the death of a primary witness. You're assuming that the case collapsed because of something in the report. But it could just have easily been something else and they held out for the GSOC report for procedural reasons.

Unlikely. If he had died in a car crash would trial have collapsed? No.
There was something in the notes, or something in his conduct that demanded answers, over and above what he would typically have done.

Mrsmum

Just a thought - is it not very unusual for a person to take their own life at work while all other employees around them are working away? I wonder is there any message in that.

MrFresh

odyssey06 wrote: »

Unlikely. If he had died in a car crash would trial have collapsed? No.

What are you basing that on? If he was the only one that could testify to the full chain of custody for an important piece of evidence then it very well could have.

Edgware

odyssey06 wrote: »

Unlikely. If he had died in a car crash would trial have collapsed? No.
There was something in the notes, or something in his conduct that demanded answers, over and above what he would typically have done.

If his evidence was vital to the trial and he died any way of course the trial would collapse.
The Defence are entitled to examine every witness. Being dead doesnt allow evidence to be admitted unchallenged. Why do you think witnesses are intimidated or killed?

There are too many Lionel Hutz standard lawyers on this site who havent a clue about very basic rules of evidence.

Calltocall

Calltocall wrote: »

It’s a difficult dilemna for the journalists particularly the ones that cover gangland as a lot of their info is fed to them by the police so what do they do when it’s the guards themselves that are under the microscope, it would take an incredibly brave one to step up as they are burning their relationships but at the end of the day didn’t they go to journalist school to get to the truth no matter the barriers, I’m doubtful though, I think a lot of the journos are too close to the police for the truth to come out.

Yeah, it's worth remembering that the journalists who really advanced and investigated the Maurice McCabe scandal were non-crime journalists like Katie Hannon and Mick Clifford - people who don't ordinarily rely upon AGS for their sources.

Pauls Williams & Cunningham were, at best, unhelpful towards uncovering of the truth in that case

If anything emerges from this story which reflects badly on AGS, I bet you a Supermacs meal deal, it won't come from a crime journalist.

odyssey06

Edgware wrote: »

If his evidence was vital to the trial and he died any way of course the trial would collapse.
The Defence are entitled to examine every witness. Being dead doesnt allow evidence to be admitted unchallenged. Why do you think witnesses are intimidated or killed?

There are too many Lionel Hutz standard lawyers on this site who havent a clue about very basic rules of evidence.

Do you have a common law precedent for the absolute inadmissability of evidence if the death of a witness occurs - rather than withdrawal or refusal to tesifty?

Mr Justice Tony Hunt, presiding, had already ruled that the images should be admitted as evidence. Opportunity to cross examine the chain of that evidence had already passed.

This is being reported in the media specifically that the case collapsed because: "He [Fox] had left notes about the case that he could not be questioned about in court and so the trial process could go no further."
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/photos-were-key-evidence-in-hutch-trial-but-did-not-cause-case-to-collapse-1.3800840

If he had not left notes and just died in a car crash, the trial process would have continued.

The Satanist

It seems to me, at least, unusual that the defence would request those emails relating to identifying who was in that photo - why would they even suspect that there was an email trail? Surely that points to being tipped off that something was up? I mean, if your going to conspire with colleagues to make sure they ID someone, why email them, they're probably in the office beside you, no?

Also, Patrick Hutch was only ever arrested once before this. His face would surely be virtually unknown, especially in Ballymun Garda station because he wasn't from there. From the photos I've seen of him in the media, versus that photo of the man dressed as a woman, I could not say with any certainty at all that it was the same person.

MrFresh

odyssey06 wrote: »

Do you have a common law precedent for the absolute inadmissability of evidence if the death of a witness occurs - rather than withdrawal or refusal to tesifty?

Mr Justice Tony Hunt, presiding, had already ruled that the images should be admitted as evidence. Opportunity to cross examine the chain of that evidence had already passed.

This is being reported in the media specifically that the case collapsed because: "He [Fox] had left notes about the case that he could not be questioned about in court and so the trial process could go no further."
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/crime-and-law/photos-were-key-evidence-in-hutch-trial-but-did-not-cause-case-to-collapse-1.3800840

If he had not left notes and just died in a car crash, the trial process would have continued.

But your assumption is that his note revealed something new when it might also be that it contained some kind of affirmation of his given statements that he hoped would be accepted as a kind of dying declaration and his evidence would be accepted on the basis of it.



People are assuming something in the case pushed him to suicide when it might also be that he had been holding off on killing himself until the case was over and he simply gave up.



Then there is the other posters assumption that he did it in work as some kind of message where it is much more likely he did it there so he would be found fast by Gardaí rather than at home where he would be found by family. He's certainly not the first Garda to have done so.

odyssey06

MrFresh wrote: »

But your assumption is that his note revealed something new when it might also be that it contained some kind of affirmation of his given statements that he hoped would be accepted as a kind of dying declaration and his evidence would be accepted on the basis of it.
People are assuming something in the case pushed him to suicide when it might also be that he had been holding off on killing himself until the case was over and he simply gave up.
Then there is the other posters assumption that he did it in work as some kind of message where it is much more likely he did it there so he would be found fast by Gardaí rather than at home where he would be found by family. He's certainly not the first Garda to have done so.

I'm assuming it is because the case collapsed and the reason given is because of the information in the notes.
If it was the reasons you suggest, the case would have collapsed and the reason given because key prosecution witness now unavailable and his evidence could not be admitted. There would no need to mention or comment on any notes in relation to the trial.

Plus, this isn't a case where Fox was the sole witness and it is his word against the defendants and the witness has not yet been cross examined.

The evidence against Hutch are (a) the photos - already admitted, and (b) what was obtained on foot of the warrant. Surely Fox wouldn't be the only person who could testify to (b)?

So unless there is something new and specific in the notes to the case I am not seeing the reason yet why Fox's unavailability causes case to collapse.

The case was weighing so heavily on Fox's mind that in his last acts he left notes specifically relating to the trial - but you assume the case had nothing to do with pushing him to suicide?

MrFresh

odyssey06 wrote: »

I'm assuming it is because the case collapsed and the reason given is because of the information in the notes.
If it was the reasons you suggest, the case would have collapsed and the reason given because key prosecution witness now unavailable and his evidence could not be admitted. There would no need to mention or comment on any notes in relation to the trial.

Plus, this isn't a case where Fox was the sole witness and it is his word against the defendants and the witness has not yet been cross examined.

The evidence against Hutch are (a) the photos - already admitted, and (b) what was obtained on foot of the warrant. Surely Fox wouldn't be the only person who could testify to (b)?

So unless there is something new and specific in the notes to the case I am not seeing the reason yet why Fox's unavailability causes case to collapse.

The case was weighing so heavily on Fox's mind that in his last acts he left notes specifically relating to the trial - but you assume the case had nothing to do with pushing him to suicide?

I've no doubt it contributed to the overall pressure he was under. You think it was weighing on his mind so much he felt the need to kill himself and write notes about it. I think it's more like he reached the end of his tether and tried to cause as little collateral damage as possible when he killed himself. The notes were intended to assist the prosecution in his absence.


As to the collapse of the trial, the prosecution said "Sadly, the passing of Det Supt Colm Fox has resulted in a situation where the prosecution is not in a position to lead evidence on a number of evidential topics". That doesn't seem to support your claim. I think you vastly underestimate the level of proof required in a criminal trial. Every person who handled a piece of evidence must be able to give testimony to say it was not interfered with. Every conversation related to the detention and questioning must be supported by testimony. Every decision made must be justified. Every minute of the accused was detained in the Garda Station must have had cause and the lead investigator is the one to justify it. Others might be able to give snippets or support certain actions but only the lead investigator will have the full picture. Garda A can say he handed evidence to Fox and Garda B can say he received it from him but neither can say he didn't interfere with it or leave it somewhere unattended. So the chain of evidence is broken.

paw patrol

MrFresh wrote: »

So you've completely ruled out any possibility that he is just one of the hundreds of people every year, mostly men, who find life to be too much? And you've completely discounted the fact that Garda suicide rates are about six times the national average.

pretty much as his final note spoke of an error of judgement which would indicate it was something specific driving it.

professore

dundalkfc10 wrote: »

She left at 17 many years ago when she fell pregnant first (ran away basically so her parents wouldn’t make her get rid) and returned in 1990 when getting a good job in Dundalk.

It’s a horrible country to live in. I live with my girlfriend both earning 30,000 (I work every Sat aswell overtime to reach 30,000) with 1 kid. We have less disposable income than our neighbours who neither have a job, HAP pay there house, free childcare, free prams etc off the social etc...

Then you see scum like this clown laughing at us after murdering someone as he walks free

And free legal aid too

MrFresh

paw patrol wrote: »

pretty much as his final note spoke of an error of judgement which would indicate it was something specific driving it.

Can you post the transcript of that note?

joe swanson

Some pretty horrendous posts on here . A decent man is dead and people are speculating on why he would end his own life and casting aspersions on his character without knowing any facts, just speculating. It's pretty low and disgusting. Thread should close.

odyssey06

MrFresh wrote: »

As to the collapse of the trial, the prosecution said "Sadly, the passing of Det Supt Colm Fox has resulted in a situation where the prosecution is not in a position to lead evidence on a number of evidential topics". That doesn't seem to support your claim. I think you vastly underestimate the level of proof required in a criminal trial. Every person who handled a piece of evidence must be able to give testimony to say it was not interfered with. Every conversation related to the detention and questioning must be supported by testimony. Every decision made must be justified. Every minute of the accused was detained in the Garda Station must have had cause and the lead investigator is the one to justify it. Others might be able to give snippets or support certain actions but only the lead investigator will have the full picture. Garda A can say he handed evidence to Fox and Garda B can say he received it from him but neither can say he didn't interfere with it or leave it somewhere unattended. So the chain of evidence is broken.

It didn't take 1 year since Fox's death to come to that conclusion. The prosecution would have been abandoned straight away if that was the real reason.
Nothing changed in 12 months, Fox still wasn't there to lead evidence.

What changed utterly was...
February 7th 2018, the court was told what was being sought was disclosure of e-mails between four gardai involved in the case.
Michael O’Higgins SC, defending, explained an issue had arisen in relation to garda statements, matters that were omitted and new statements that came together and “hit every single note on the scale."

On Saturday, February 10, 2018 senior investigator in the case Det Supt Colm Fox was found dead at Ballymun Garda Station. His official firearm was recovered at the scene, foul play was not suspected and it was treated as a personal tragedy.

The following Tuesday, February 13, Judge Hunt adjourned the case again after being told of Det Sgt Fox’s death.

On February, 19, 2018 Mr O’Higgins said new material had been provided which he needed more time to consider. The material had presented “unprecedented conundrums” for the prosecution, Sean Gillane SC, prosecuting, said.

MrFresh

odyssey06 wrote: »

It didn't take 1 year since Fox's death to come to that conclusion. The prosecution would have been abandoned straight away if that was the real reason.
Nothing changed in 12 months, Fox still wasn't there to lead evidence.

What changed utterly was...
February 7th 2018, the court was told what was being sought was disclosure of e-mails between four gardai involved in the case.
Michael O’Higgins SC, defending, explained an issue had arisen in relation to garda statements, matters that were omitted and new statements that came together and “hit every single note on the scale."

On Saturday, February 10, 2018 senior investigator in the case Det Supt Colm Fox was found dead at Ballymun Garda Station. His official firearm was recovered at the scene, foul play was not suspected and it was treated as a personal tragedy.

The following Tuesday, February 13, Judge Hunt adjourned the case again after being told of Det Sgt Fox’s death.

On February, 19, 2018 Mr O’Higgins said new material had been provided which he needed more time to consider. The material had presented “unprecedented conundrums” for the prosecution, Sean Gillane SC, prosecuting, said.

Right, the conundrum of whether a suicide note could be given any evidential value or whether additional evidence could be found to support what was in the note.

odyssey06

joe swanson wrote: »

Some pretty horrendous posts on here . A decent man is dead and people are speculating on why he would end his own life and casting aspersions on his character without knowing any facts, just speculating. It's pretty low and disgusting. Thread should close.

I've no idea if he was or was not a decent man, not sure what aspersions have been cast here on his character to compare to:
A senior counsel in open court has effectively accused him of participation in a miscarriage of justice in a murder trial.
GSOC are officially investigating that "the circumstances giving rise to the death of the late Det Supt Fox".

But yeah, attempt to shut down debate on an internet forum.

Cee-Jay-Cee

Criminal informer wrote: »

Two detectives not witnesses! Even the reporters are saying there's a lot more to come out, to say he got aquitted just because of ID is naive. The longer gardai stay quite the more rumours will follow as to why.

Typical of the ridiculous manner which AGS treats the media. In every other country in the world they have press releases where they provide info to prevent speculation and rumour. Here they say nothing and when they do it’s usually the usual shíte line of we don’t comment on cases. AGS need to come out if the dark ages and speak up for themselves but it’ll never change unril the promotion system of only promoting those who lick arse continues.

OneOfThem Stumbled

grahambo wrote: »

Welcome to Boards.ie fonesmasher1, great first post.

1 post.

Joined 3 days ago.

Permabanned? :eek:

Cee-Jay-Cee

Macdarack wrote: »

Flat cap Murray seemed to be easily recognised in the photo after the shooting, I know he died from an illness but how was he not in custody following the murder, was he in hiding?

He was arrested in NI and extradition process started but due to his illness the court decided not to grant his extradition....as far as I can remember.