DPP given deadline to reply to question on Offaly speeding summons

THE DPP has been given until March 11 next by Judge Andrew Cody to answer a question about the admissibility of nomination forms in speeding prosecutions.

Judge Cody's move came after he sought a submission from the DPP on his intention to state a case at the High Court.

Owners of vehicles are often prosecuted for speeding after being recorded by a GoSafe operator even though they were not driving at the time.

The owner can complete what is known as a nomination form where the actual driver is named and then summonsed.

At Tullamore District Court in December, Andrew Dunne, BL, appearing for John Christopher O'Dea (63), Colt, Ballyroan, Co Laois, applied to Judge Cody not to admit a nomination form.

READ NEXT: Proposed new Offaly hospital gets five-year planning consent extension

Mr O'Dea has been summonsed for allegedly exceeding the 80km/h speed limit on the N80 road at Ballynasrah, Killeigh on August 19, 2024.

The evidence from a GoSafe operator was that he was travelling at 90 km/h.

Mr O'Dea was summonsed for the alleged offence and Sergeant Brendan Kearns, court presenter, handed in a certificate of ownership for the vehicle, which named Delaney Commercials Ltd, and a certificate of nomination.

When Judge Cody asked if the nomination form was an original or a certified copy, Sergeant Kearns said it was not.

Mr Dunne said Mr O'Dea had been nominated by someone else. Mr Dunne said it was clear to him from the relevant section of the Road Traffic Act that only an original document could be admissible in court.

He said it had been confirmed by the court presenter Sergeant Kearns that the document presented by the prosecution was neither an original or a duly authenticated copy.

When Judge Cody viewed the document handed in by Sergeant Kearns he said it “looks to be signed by a Shane Moore”.

Sergeant Kearns said Shane Moore was the fleet manager with Delaney Commercials and further stated that the original document would be held by the Garda fixed charge office in Thurles.

Sergeant Kearns said the gardai process about 200,000 fixed charge notices each year and they are “heavily reliant” on an automated process which involves scanning the original nominations as they are received.

Sergeant Kearns said scanned versions are used but are an “exact copy” of the originals.

Seargeant Kearns said the copy that he wished to hand into court was part of the prosecutor pack which had been printed by a company called Tico Print Limited in Dublin.

He said it would be a “hugely retrograde step” for the efficiency of An Garda Siochana processes to produce those documents in court and they rely on a presumption in the act unless evidence is presented to the contrary.

The judge remarked that the prosecution could be “inserting” into that presumption a copy of the original document and Mr Dunne said the specific section of the act applies to the original.

Judge Cody sought submissions and said he would state a case on the question of the admissibility of the nominations forms. He adjourned the matter until February this year.

In the District Court on Wednesday (February 25) Sergeant Kearns asked for one more week, saying he was awaiting a written direction and had submitted an investigation file to the DPP.

Sergeant Kearns said he believed there may be a possible application from the DPP to withdraw the matter.

READ NEXT: Offaly company plays role in Munster county's GAA gate receipts topping €1 million

Judge Cody said the case had already been “part heard” and added that he had asked for a submission from the DPP up to 10 weeks previously.

“I haven't heard a dicky bird. Nothing,” remarked the judge.

Mr Dunne said the issue would arise even if it is withdrawn as it is an “ongoing issue” in such prosecutions.

Patrick Martin, a solicitor who has represented others prosecuted for alleged speeding offences, told the court the same issue “affects other cases”.

Judge Cody said the issue was a simple one and turned on the question: “Is the prosecution entitled to rely on what they purport to be a photocopy of the original nomination form, provided as part of the prosecution pack by a third party where it has not been duly authenticated?”

He said he wanted a reply from the DPP within two weeks without prevarication, “a simple yes or no”, otherwise he would go ahead and state a case.

Adjourning the matter to March 11, he also told Sergeant Kearns: “I won't allow the case to be withdrawn, it's part heard.”

Judge Cody had said in December it was his view that the prosecution was only entitled to rely on the copy of a document when it's certified to be a true copy of the original.

A case stated [where it is referred to the High Court] could “take the bones of nine months”, said the judge.