A 17-year-old charged with the murder of gunman Tristan Sherry in Blanchardstown on Christmas Eve has been granted bail after successfully appealing a previous High Court decision refusing his application.
However, in a judgement delivered on Tuesday, the Court of Appeal upheld the High Court’s decision to refuse bail to two other men charged with the murder.
Mr Sherry (26) was killed after he shot and fatally injured Jason Hennessy Senior on December 24th 2023 at Browne’s Steakhouse in Blanchardstown. Mr Hennessy died eleven days later.
The teenager, who cannot be identified because he is a minor, was granted bail by the court subject to a number of conditions, including that he stays away from a list of named individuals, that he observe a curfew, that he surrender his passport and that he sign on twice a week.
His co-accused David Amah (18), of Hazel Grove, Portrane Road, Donabate and Michael Andrecut (22), Sheephill Avenue, Dublin 15 have also been charged with Mr Sherry's murder.
They will both remain in custody after the court found that their risk of flight was “significant” and could not be effectively addressed by imposing rigorous bail terms and conditions.
In delivering judgement, Court of Appeal President Mr Justice George Birmingman said that concerns about future offending by the three applicants did not, in the court’s view, meet the threshold to justify a refusal of bail under Section 2 of the 1997 Bail Act.
He said it was clear the judge had concerns that all three applicants were at risk of reprisals, and if reprisals were to follow there would be risks to the community, in particular to those who might find themselves, wittingly or unwittingly, in close proximity to one or other of the applicants.
Mr Justice Birmingham said that while the court fully understood the reasoning of the judge, Mr Justice Tony Hunt, it could not lose sight of the fact that the Act states that a court may refuse bail if it is satisfied it is necessary to prevent the commission of a serious offence “by that person”.
“While one has to have concerns that one or all of the applicants might engage in actions seeking to avenge the death of Mr Hennessy Snr, it does not seem to us to reach the threshold of causing us to believe that refusal of bail is reasonably necessary to prevent the commission of a serious offence,” he said in the judgement.
The judge said that as the High Court decision to refuse bail to the juvenile was based on Section 2 of the Act only, the court was prepared to release the teenager on bail, subject to conditions.
However, in the case of Mr Amah and Mr Andrecut, Mr Justice Birmingham said the assessment of the flight risk was informed by the fact that, unusually, the entire incident was caught on CCTV, from beginning to end.
He said one of the most significant aspects of the availability of the CCTV footage is that each of the applicants now know in full detail the case against them and must have an appreciation of just how serious their individual situations are. He said the “temptation to flee and avoid trial must be very great”.
The court previously heard that Mr Andrecut’s passport was in a bag thrown on a dog cage in the kitchen of his house when gardaí arrived three days after the incident.
The Court of Appeal on Tuesday said it found that the judge was entitled to reach the conclusion he made in relation to the passport – that he did not believe there was “any accident or carelessness about its positioning”.
The court went on to say that it was also the case that both Mr Andrecut and Mr Amah have links to other countries.
Mr Justice Birmingham said that while there was nothing unusual about this, and it was certainly not the case that because someone has links to another country they cannot be granted bail, it was a factor to be “weighed in the balance”.
“Overall, we are of the view that the risk of flight is significant indeed and is not a risk which can be effectively addressed by admitting the applicants to bail and imposing rigorous terms and conditions,” he said.
Fiona Murphy SC, for the Director of Public Prosecutions, this afternoon told the court that the terms of bail for the juvenile had been agreed and outlined these to the court.
She said the conditions include that the teenager reside at a specific address and that he stay away from another named address.
She also told the court the youth is to have no contact with a number of named individuals, that he is to observe a curfew between 11am and 7pm, that he is to sign on two days a week and that he surrender his passport.
Having heard details of the conditions, Mr Justice Birmingham said the court would admit the applicant to bail on those terms.
