R v Ivor Bell (Application to Exclude the Boston Tapes Evidence)
| Jurisdiction | Northern Ireland |
| Judge | O'Hara J |
| Judgment Date | 16 October 2019 |
| Neutral Citation | [2019] NICC 20 |
| Court | Crown Court (Northern Ireland) |
| Date | 16 October 2019 |
1
Neutral C itation No: [2019] NICC 20
Judgme nt: approved by the Court for handing down
(subject to editorial corrections)*
Ref: OHA11086
Delivered: 16/10/2019
IN THE CROWN COURT SITT ING AT BELFAST
________
R
-v-
IVOR BELL
________
Application to Exclud e
the Boston Tapes Evidence
_________
O’HARA J
[1] The accused, Ivor Bell, was charged with two offences of soliciting the murder
in 1972 of Mrs Jean McConville. On the first charge he was accused of encouraging
persons not before the cou rt to murder her contrary to Sectio n 4 of the Offences
Against Person Act 1861 and common law. On the second charge he was accused of
endeavouring to persuade persons not before the cou rt to murder her, again
contrary to Section 4 and common law.
[2] The evidence on which the prosecution case relies is what it asserts is a
confession made by Mr Be ll to Mr Anthony McIntyre in 2004. It is contended by the
defence that the circumstances in whi ch Mr Bel l confe ssed to Mr McIntyre are such
that the evidence of that confession should be excluded under Article 74(2) and
Article 76 of the Pol ice and Criminal Evidence (Northern Ireland) Order 1989.
[3] It is necessary to set ou t the background to this case in order to put the
application to exclude the evidence in context.
Background
[4] Mr Bell is now 82 years old and suffers fro m vascu lar dementi a. He is not fit
to stand trial. Accordingly the issue for the jury at the end of this hearing will be
whether he did the acts alleged by the Crown, not whether he is guilty of the
offences charged. That differe nce is not something which affects the rul ing I have to
give. The questi on of what evidence is admissible is not affected by this being a
hearing of the facts.
To continue reading
Request your trial
1 cases
-
The People (at the suit of the Director of Public Prosecutions) v BK
...might be kept to oneself as a confidence. This, therefore, is a much different setting to the issue tried by O'Hara J in R v Bell [2019] NICC 20, as to the admissibility in a criminal trial in Northern Ireland of a videoed recording, apparently with the accused, where confidentiality had be......