Pre-trial publicity and other issues in murder case are best left to be addressed by trial judge

Clarke J (nem diss): Criminal law – judicial review – prohibition of trial – murders of two women living in sheltered accommodation at Grangegorman Psychiatric Hospital – Mark Nash and Dean Lyons both confessed but neither convicted – forensic evidence later emerged which now leads to the trial of Mark Nash – prejudice arising from the lapse of time between the murders and his likely trial date – culpable delay – whether Mr. Nash's trial has been irreparably prejudiced by inappropriate pre-trial publicity – lapse of time jurisprudence – strong constitutional value in a court ultimately determining the rights and wrongs of the competing positions – meaning of “unfair trial” – one of the central issues in the case, being the extent to which the relevant forensic evidence may be considered probative, seems likely to be capable of being fully explored at the trial – forensic DNA evidence now available – trial should only be prohibited from going ahead where it is clear that such balance lies against a full trial on the merits being permitted – trial to proceed – appeal dismissed.

Charleton J: Criminal law – adverse publicity – absence of witnesses or the loss of evidence – substantial risk of an unfair trial – primary role of the trial judge in ensuring fairness in criminal cases – delay or prejudice due to the loss of or unavailability of witnesses – disclosure and sedevacantists – adequacy of disclosure – trial to proceed.