A man was found not guilty of arson following a trial at Waterford Circuit Court recently.
John Sprice (39) with an address at 93 Priory Lawn, Ballybeg, Waterford appeared before Judge Eugene O’Kelly for the two-day trial.
He was charged with criminal damage by fire (known as arson) contrary to Section 2 (1) and (4) of the Criminal Damage Act 1991, and produced in court from prison, where he is currently serving a sentence for an unrelated matter.
A jury of seven men and five women were empanelled for the trial, with prosecuting barrister Niall Storan BL acting on behalf of the state, and Gareth Hayden BL appearing as defence counsel for the accused.
May 2023 incident
The court heard the charge related to an incident that occurred at John’s Lane, Waterford city, in the early hours of 8 May 2023, when Gardaí received a report that a car parked in the area had been damaged. The passenger seat had been set alight, and the adjoining window on that side was smashed.
A security guard working in Market Bar told Gardaí that he was walking back to his car at 1.30am that morning after finishing his shift, when he noticed a ‘flickering’ light in a car parked ahead of his own on John’s Lane. As he got closer to the car, he noticed a man leaning into the passenger side, and saw a flame on the front seat.
The security guard said that the man looked at him, said “it wasn’t me”, and immediately ran off. He was able to smother the flame with a plastic bag and called Gardaí.
The security guard later reported that he recognised the man as John Sprice, someone who had previously been ejected from the Market Bar. The accused was arrested by Gardaí, and denied involvement.
During the trial last week, the owner of the car firstly gave evidence. He told the court that he noticed his car was missing that day, and reported it to Gardaí. The man said he also contacted his insurance company who told him that they would make contact about repairs with a garage they have a contract with. However, he was told that the car was not able to be fixed.
The man added that although his insurance company provided him with money to buy a new car, he was left without one for three months following the incident. He also clarified to the court that he has no involvement with Market Bar.
The security guard then gave evidence to the court. He said he finished his shift around 1.30am, and began walking to his car that was parked on John’s Lane.
“It wasn’t me”
He told the court: “There was a flickering light in a car ahead, like someone was watching a video. As I got around 15 metres away from the car, I noticed a man. He looked at me, said ‘it wasn’t me’, and ran in the direction I came from.”
The security guard added in his evidence that he recognised the man as the accused, and later looked up his Facebook profile to confirm this. He said that the accused was kicked out of Market Bar on the same night and had told him that he knew the bar manager. The security guard confirmed that the manager was aware of the accused’s identity.
After the security guard checked his Facebook profile, he made a statement to Gardaí and said that the man he saw near the car was John Sprice.
Mr. Hayden told the security guard that he was incorrect, and mistakenly believed the man he saw for ‘a couple of seconds’ was the accused, and questioned why he did not provide Gardaí with the bar manager’s name, despite making two statements.
The security guard replied: “it’s only that I saw.”
Investigating Garda Aoife O’Gorman told the court she received a report that night stating that the inside of a car was set on fire. She went to the scene, and observed that the passenger window was smashed, with an item on the front seat that appeared to be a rock, but turned out to be a log.
Garda O’Gorman added that the passenger seat was burned, had scorch marks on it, and the glove box was open with items and broken glass spread across the footwell. She took photos of the car at the scene, and three of these were shown to the jury.
The Garda said the car was seized and she applied for DNA testing to be carried out on it. It was swabbed for fingerprints and tested, but no match came back. She also made enquiries with businesses near the scene, but CCTV on a nearby premises was not working that evening.
Garda O’Gorman was able to extract CCTV from Hillbilly’s restaurant, and said that it shows a person leaving the area alone at approximately 1.40am that night, but this person was not able to be identified.
No DNA match
Mr. Hayden asked the Garda if his client’s DNA was found on the car, to which she replied that there was no match for any person found on it. The barrister asked why she did not keep a copy of the photo from the Facebook profile found by the security guard, and she said that he had worked in the bar for a number of years, and was ‘confident’ that the accused was the man he saw.
Garda O’Gorman added that even if DNA doesn’t come back as a match on something, this doesn’t mean it’s not present. She said: “There are surfaces where it can take to better, and cars aren’t amazing for this, unfortunately.”
Detective Garda Kevin Cleere confirmed to the court that the accused was arrested and questioned on 5 September 2023. Det Garda Cleere said that the accused was asked about his whereabouts on the night in question, to which he replied: “I don’t know, I’m in Waterford city every day.”
The accused told Gardaí he was involved in ‘altercations’ at Market Bar before, and had been kicked out. When he was asked why the security guard had identified him as being involved, he said: “I don’t go around damaging people’s property. I’ve been in altercations there before. You’ve the wrong man – it wasn’t me; I didn’t do it.”
Det Garda Cleere confirmed that the accused was co-operative when interviewed, answered all questions, and provided a DNA sample.
“Direct and powerful” evidence
In his closing speech, Mr. Storan told the jury that the reality of the case was ‘straightforward’, as there was direct eye-witness evidence from the security guard who saw the accused run from the scene. He described the security guard’s evidence as “direct and powerful” and said that although people can frequently make mistakes with identification evidence, he didn’t.
Mr. Storan added that the fact that the security checked the accused’s Facebook profile showed “care and honesty”, and it was ‘strong’ identification evidence. He told the jury that the CCTV footage “didn’t have to” identify him, but it showed a lone person leaving the area at that exact time.
Mr. Hayden said in his closing speech that the security guard’s evidence should be approached with ‘caution.’ He told the jury that street lighting is nowhere near as good as daylight, and anyone can ‘think’ they see someone during the day, only to realise it’s not the person you were thinking of as you get closer. He emphasised that “people get these things wrong.”
Mr. Hayden added the fact that the security guard never mentioned the name of the bar manager meant that another ‘potential’ witness was not heard from in court. He referenced the fact that the Facebook photo was not retained, and that no DNA was found on the car, stating that the evidence was ‘weak’.
The barrister added that the CCTV footage which Mr. Storan made reference to was not used in evidence or played to the jury. He told the jury that the fact that his client accepts he previously had altercations with people in Market Bar and answered all questions when interviewed had “all the hallmarks of someone telling the truth,” and the fact the CCTV footage was not used pointed to a doubt in the prosecution's evidence.
Following a deliberation of just under 30 minutes, the jury found the accused not guilty of arson.
Funded by the Court Reporting Scheme
Robyn Power
