JURORS in the trial of a Limerick Garda accused of “sorting out” motoring offences for drivers, retired this Friday morning to consider verdicts in the case.
The jury, which was reduced from 12 to 11 jurors, after the trial got underway on May 27th, was directed by the trial judge, Colin Daly, to find the accused, Garda Tom Flavin, “not guilty” of five putting a total of twenty-two allegations of attempting to pervert the course of justice.
They are now considering verdicts in respect of the remaining 17 counts against Mr Flavin, (51), who denies all the charges.
On Thursday, Mr Flavin’s barrister, senior counsel Mark Nicholas, instructed by solicitor Dan O’Gorman, urged the jury to acquit Mr Flavin of all of the charges.
In his closing speech, Mr Nicholas said there was no direct evidence that Mr Flavin was guilty of wrongdoing.
Mr Flavin is accused of knowingly entering false motor insurance details on the Garda Pulse computer records system, in an attempt to frustrate potential prosecutions against persons for driving without insurance.
The drivers involved were stopped at routine Garda checkpoints around the country and asked by the garda present to produce their insurance and licence details at a nominated Garda station within ten days of the traffic stop.
All of the drivers involved nominated Rathkeale garda station, and, later, when the investigating garda in each of the stops carried out follow up checks of Pulse they were satisfied that details entered into the system indicated that the driver in each case was insured.
However, the court heard the drivers were actually not insured and some were prosecuted in court afterwards after pleading guilty to driving without insurance at the time they had been stopped by Gardaรญ.
Mr Nicholas told the jury Mr Flavin was an exemplary garda who had served with dedication in Croom and Rathkeale, Co Limerick, for many years.
Urging the jury to acquit the accused and not fall into the trap of speculation, Mr Nicholas said there was radically insufficient evidence to support a conviction.
“He (Mr Flavin) served his community without blemish and without any disciplinary blots – you know that from the evidence. When other Gardai came to give evidence, his superiors, they spoke of him very fondly and well – It wasn’t far off gushing and they spoke with knowledge,” Mr Nicholas said.
The defence barrister spoke of the “unique challenges” Gardai face in Rathkeale as opposed to other jurisdictions.
“People who live down here know it has an enormous population, transient, in and out at various times of the year. One policeman said (the population) quadruples and with that comes its own set of problems and own sets of vehicles – UK car registrations, UK insurance, some not insured, some not being entirely truthful.”
“We know that a certain number of times that people who were pulled up and stopped and asked for their documentation, produced bogus insurance certificates.”
Mr Nicholas said the charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice is an extraordinarily, serious allegation to make against a serving Garda.
“That he (Mr Flavin) must have deliberately, knowing the (insurance) certificate to be false, inputted it into the system with the intention that it would frustrate a prosecution. There has been nothing close to this level of proof in this case whatsoever,” added Mr Nicholas.
The court heard evidence that persons provided documents at Rathkeale garda station, however it was unclear who produced what and what they had produced.
In her final summation to the jury, Fiona Murphy SC, prosecuting, said Tom Flavin enjoyed the presumption of innocence, and that the burden of proof “beyond a reasonable doubt” was all on the prosecution.
Ms Murphy said Mr Flavin had “nothing to prove”; she added that the DPP’s case was “a circumstantial case”.
“There is no direct evidence, instead the prosecution relies on indirect evidence,” Ms Murphy told the jury.
Ms Murphy argued that all of the relevant data entries into Pulse “were entered under the ID of Thomas Flavin”.
Ms Murphy explained that a statute of limitation of “six months” generally applied in respect of prosecuting offences of driving without insurance.
She said: “It is the prosecution’s case that Tom Flavin knew they (the motorists involved) were not covered (by insurance) and that he entered the details onto PULSE to ensure they (appeared) covered.”
“Mr Flavin knew what he was doing, and he did so to ensure those persons were insured (on PULSE) when they were not, in order to ensure there was no prosecution,” Ms Murphy alleged.
