Gardaí could not prove Kildare man had driven car
Photo for illustrative purposes only
A DRIVER had a charge against him dismissed at Carlow District Court for driving a defective vehicle because gardaí could not prove that he had driven the vehicle in a public place.
The court heard how on 12 September 2025 at 11pm, Cillian Kelly was driving a car that was in the proximity of, but not involved in, a fatal traffic collision on the N80 between a vehicle and a cyclist. Mr Kelly of Tonlegee Lawns, Athy, Co Kildare had driven home and then called gardaí as his car had been damaged by being in the proximity of the crash. Gardaí then decided to seize his car for evidence.
As Sgt Lacey was explaining the prosecution’s case, solicitor Chris Hogan objected, saying that Sgt Lacey was not the one who conducted the investigation and called her evidence hearsay.
Sgt Lacey admitted that she was not at the scene, had not spoken directly to Mr Kelly and was not the member of An Garda Síochána who seized Mr Kelly’s vehicle. She also agreed with Mr Hogan that the information that the court had heard was based on information she had gleaned from colleagues and statements people had given or taken.
Garda James then took the stand, explaining that he had carried out the examination of Mr Kelly’s car in a secure facility. From his examination, he had made a number of observations which might have rendered the car defective, to do with the rear tyres. He said that there was patch-wear on both of the rear tyres, which meant that the car must have been involved in excessive hand-braking. He added that the passenger-side rear tyre was below the acceptable tread, concluding that the car was dangerously defective as a result.
At the time, Mr Kelly’s NCT was valid until 4 February 2026.
Mr Hogan then put in an application for the summons to be dismissed, saying that the threshold of proof that gardaí must reach by admissible evidence, and not hearsay as was Sgt Lacey’s testimony, had not been reached. There was no evidence presented that proved that Mr Kelly had been driving that car in a public place.
Judge Gubbins said that based on Sgt Lacey’s evidence, proof that Mr Kelly was driving the car in a public place had not been reached. He found that the state had admitted that it could not plug the evidence gap. As there was no evidence that Mr Kelly was driving the vehicle, Judge Gubbins said that he had to dismiss the case.
