Graham Dwyer leaving Dun Laoghaire Courthouse after being charged with the murder of Elaine O’Hara in 2013
This morning.
Via RTÉ News:
Europe’s top court confirmed this morning that Ireland’s system of retaining and accessing mobile phone metadata breaches EU law.
Such data was a key part of the prosecution’s case against Graham Dwyer, who was convicted in 2015 of the murder of Elaine O’Hara in August 2012
The court also outlined the circumstances in which the targeted retention of such data is permitted under EU law.
It confirmed that EU law precluded national legislation that provided for the general and indiscriminate retention of mobile phone metadata.
It said it had already held that the objective of combating serious crime, as fundamental as it may be, did not justify this.
Meanwhile…
The case will now go back to the Supreme Court, which is likely to rule in his favour.
But his appeal will be determined by the Court of Appeal which will hear arguments about the admissibility of this evidence at his trial.
There is also a previous Supreme Court judgment which allows evidence to be admitted, even if a person’s rights are breached, as long as that breach was inadvertent or in good faith.
Ireland’s retention of Dwyer phone data breaches EU law (RTE)
Law and jurisprudence are complicated and engrossing subjects that exercise the minds of trained legal people. The pursuit of justice is often handled by Gardai, private investigators and inquisitive journalists – all of them subject to the vagaries of legality. Justice is an outcome that the general public hopes for when the lawyers, judges and juries have concluded their onerous proceedings.
is there any case for looking at the GDPR rules to see if they actually make sense? They seem to be accepted as gospel and the “GDPR experts” are treated in interviews with as much respect and deference, or more, than the mightiest Archbishop was ever treated.
Will the EU and Ireland ever take a second look at GDPR and ask if the legislation got the balance right at the first attempt.
Both the murder (2012) and the court case (2015) pre-dates GDPR (2016-2018).
My error. I was thinking of the entire data protection area and using the GDPR label to cover the whole approach and way of thinking. To a non-expert it seems to put individual data privacy rights every every other consideration.
The word jurisprudence always reminds me of one of my favourite headlines from The Onion – Jurisprudence Fetishist Gets Off On Technicality
High end wordplay.
So a scum bag guilty as hell is now in the position of getting off
No justice
Looks likely, but thems the ones that make the rules.
Rules do not bring justice when a murderer murders
We are not talking about chess but you are right .he will most probably sue the state and get millions
He’s not going anywhere:
There is also a previous Supreme Court judgment which allows evidence to be admitted, even if a person’s rights are breached, as long as that breach was inadvertent or in good faith.
I hope you’re right Bill, I really do