Forensic evidence will prove a former Huddersfield man did not kill two women, a court was told.
The defence counsel in the trial of Mark Nash, accused of murdering two women eighteen years ago, has told a murder trial jury that the forensic evidence found at the scene supports the innocence of his client.
Nash, 42, who grew up in Bradley but had been living in Dublin, has pleaded not guilty at the Central Criminal Court to the murder of Sylvia Shields, 60, and Mary Callanan 61, between March 6 and March 7, 1997.
The trial has heard the two women were living in sheltered accommodation in a house attached to St Brendan’s Psychiatric Hospital in Grangegorman at the time.
Counsel for the accused Mr Hugh Hartnett SC told the jury of six men and five women that he would bring them to parts of the evidence that had been “ignored” by the prosecution as it has “a devastating effect on this case”.
He added that if the defence hadn’t been in the courtroom to ask the questions, the jury would be “lacking a very significant amount of relevant information.”
The court heard previously how Dean Lyons, now deceased. was the first person who made an independent admission to the murder of Sylvia Shields and Mary Callanan and he was charged with the murder of Mary Callanan.
“They were of the view there was a a case and a significant case against Dean Lyons,” said Mr Hartnett.
The evidence in relation to the admissions by Dean Lyons was “steered clear of you by the prosecution” said Mr Hartnett.
“There was never an explanation given to you concerning how Dean Lyons knew the circumstances of the Grangegorman killings. It was only on day 24 of the trial when former Assistant Commissioner of An Garda Siochana James McHugh eventually agreed to address the corroboration of Dean Lyon’s statement. We would be trying the case in blinkers if we didn’t bring this to you,” said Mr Hartnett.
“He referred to the use of a fork in the murders, how did he know this if he hadn’t been there. He said he left by the front door and the safety chain was off it and this is correct. He demonstrated how he had taken bits of glass out of the window and piled it up outside the window. That’s a very specific action, how did he know about it unless he had done it?” said the defence counsel.
“I ask you do you consider these matters to be of relevance, if Dean Lyons knew about these things, he could only have known about them if he had been there. If Dean Lyons was there, Mark Nash was not there. I have given you twenty specific points which could only be known by someone at the scene,” said Mr Hartnett.
The defence counsel then spoke about the examination of the scene at Orchard View days following the “awful murders.”
“Forensics found no hair from Mark Nash and no DNA from him on the premises. The black fibres found on the window came from somebody else’s clothing. What is all this forensic evidence indicating, that Mark Nash wasn’t present,” said Mr Hartnett.
“The forensic evidence found at the scene supports the innocence of Mark Nash as nothing was found. For twelve years the DPP did not see fit to bring a prosecution against Mark Nash, was this because it was clear his statement were totally flawed. For twelve years nothing happened,” added Mr Hartnett.
Mr Harnett concluded how the findings that the jacket belonging to the accused and heavily blood stained clothing and bedding found at the scene being examined in the same room at a laboratory six weeks apart were “consistent with contamination.”
“If Mark Nash was wearing this jacket when he carried out these murders, one would expect to find considerable amounts of blood and that wasn’t there. No remains of dry cleaned stains could be found on the jacket or of washed out stains.”
“Having looked at all of the evidence there is more than doubt in this case. It is not sufficient to say possibly he did it or probably he did it , you must be satisfied that beyond any reasonable doubt that Mark Nash is guilty and I submit the evidence falls well below that. I would ask you to acquit Mark Nash,” concluded Mr Hartnett.
