The jury in the trial of a 56-year-old law professor and farmer accused of the murder of a trespasser on his land is expected to begin considering its verdict next week.
Diarmuid Phelan denies murdering 35-year-old Keith Conlon at Hazelgrove Farm, Kiltalown Lane, Tallaght in Dublin in February 2022.
Closing speeches by lawyers for the prosecution and defence have finished and the judge has begun her charge to the jury.
Defence counsel, Sean Guerin concluded his speech, telling the jury that Mr Phelan was on trial for murder because of his “restraint, self-control, patience” and his “quiet hope” that others would exhibit respect for the law that protected us all.
Mr Guerin said Keith Conlon had “no such respect”.
Mr Guerin said Mr Conlon did not believe a law abiding citizen would meet his threat of force with force and learned “a tragic lesson” on terrain and with a gun where the prospect of accidental injury was a very real possibility.
The jury has heard Mr Conlon and two others were trespassing on Mr Phelan’s land on 22 February 2022 and were engaged in fox bolting or badger baiting with dogs. After Mr Phelan shot one of their dogs, Mr Conlon and his friend Kallum Coleman approached him.
Mr Phelan said he fired three warning shots in the air, one of which accidentally hit Mr Conlon. The prosecution alleges he deliberately aimed at Mr Conlon.
Mr Guerin told the jury that after Mr Phelan shot the men’s dog, he retreated, waited, called for help and then waited again before pleading with them to stay back.
He said the tragedy was that Mr Phelan had waited “too long” to fire his revolver, meaning that Mr Conlon was coming up a hill towards him as the final shot was fired.
Mr Guerin also suggested that while the jury may be thinking that a farmer has no business with a handgun, the IFA were training farmers how to use them. And he said Mr Phelan used his guns to control vermin and other animals on his farm lawfully and appropriately.
He said on 22 February 2022, Mr Phelan was placed in a situation where the firearm in his pocket was his only line of defence against an imminent attack where he was outnumbered and had no way out.
Although Mr Guerin said it was notable that Mr Phelan did not reach for the more powerful and more dangerous rifle he had nearby.
He told the jurors the prosecution was suggesting the only explanation for the shooting was “murderous intent” on behalf of Mr Phelan. But he said defence experts had put forward rational, valid and to a very significant extent, uncontradicted explanations as to why a gun would fire lower than intended. These included stress, the weight of the gun and the terrain involved.
Mr Guerin said due to a number of previous incidents that had happened on the farm, Mr Phelan had a “perfectly rational and justified” sense of being under a low-level long-running siege, with periods of “intense and terrifying” intrusions.
He said that on 22 February, there was such an intrusion onto his farm by the three men, one of whom was a friend of someone who had previously threatened him.
He said there was no explanation as to why the men would not keep their distance from Mr Phelan, except that they were going to attack him.
The incident happened he said in the split seconds before the men were in a position to assault Mr Phelan.
He suggested that Mr Phelan did not draw his gun until the last second in circumstances where the physical layout of the land, the type of gun and stress meant that his third warning shot was not accurate.
The jury has also been addressed this week by prosecution counsel, Roisin Lacey.
She told the jury that the conflict between Mr Conlon and Mr Phelan had been “purely verbal” and asked how Mr Phelan made the leap where he felt the only option was to produce a lethal weapon and point it in the direction of a trespasser.
She described his action as a “disproportionate” and “excessive” response to what was facing him, asking if he had been blinded by his past experience and deep rooted conception that he was going to be attacked.
She said there was no doubt Mr Phelan was “mithered” by a wide gamut of offences by people coming onto his land – theft, criminal damage, arson, illegal dumping, littering.
But, she said, none of the previous incidents on the farm involved the three men on the land that day.
She suggested Mr Phelan had had enough and reached the end of his tether.
Ms Lacey pointed out to the jury that the trespassers had no weapons at all as they approached Mr Phelan and said before the fatal shot was fired that Mr Conlon had turned to go.
She suggested nothing in the encounter could have led Mr Phelan to believe he was being presented with a threat, justifying his action to produce a concealed weapon from his pocket and fire it repeatedly towards Mr Conlon.
Ms Lacey also reminded the jurors about “graphic” and “grotesque” videos they had seen from Mr Conlon’s phone, including footage of dogs being trained to attack a live kitten.
She said it was not a case about emotion or sympathy for an animal or person and Mr Conlon was not on trial for his criminal behaviour or the morality of bolting foxes or blooding dogs.
Judge Siobhan Lankford has begun her charge to the jury.
She will summarise the evidence and outline the legal principles they must abide by in reaching their decision.
She will continue her charge next week as some jury members have commitments this week. They are expected to begin considering their verdict after that.
