HomeNewsLimerick man accused in fatal burglary case could not be located in...

Limerick man accused in fatal burglary case could not be located in prison

-

29/8/2015.   Michael Casey(32), Bay 5 Clonlong Halting Site, Limerick appearing at a special sitting of  Limerick District Court. Photograph Liam Burke/Press22
Michael Casey 

Andrew Carey

[email protected]

ONE of the two men charged in connection with a Limerick burglary that resulted in the death of the homeowner near the village of Doon last August could not be located when court officials tried to determine what prison he was being held in.

At Limerick District Court on Tuesday, Michael Casey (32) of Clonlong Halting Site, Southill was sent forward for trial at the Circuit Court on four charges in relation to thefts and criminal damage at homes in East Limerick last August.

His cousin David Casey (21) of Caragh Park, Coolock, Dublin 17 is facing the same charges but Judge Marian O’Leary was told that he was not in attendance at the court because there was confusion in the prison service about where he was being held.

The court was later told that he was being held in Wheatfield prison and that he would be present in court next week to be served with the book of evidence.

The cousins were arrested after 62-year-old John O’Donoghue collapsed and died of a heart attack after he interrupted two intruders at his home in Toomaline Upper, Doon on August 27 last.

Mr O’Donoghue, a noted carpenter in the area, had arrived back home with his sister at the time of the incident to make the discovery that his home had been ransacked.

The Casey cousins are charged with theft of a ladies watch and sum of sterling cash at Mr O’Donoghue’s home.

They also face charges of stealing €1,000 worth of jewellery from a house at Kyle, Cappamore on the same date.

It is also alleged that they caused €370 worth of criminal damage to houses in Dromsalagh and Portnard in Cappamore.

After Michael Casey was returned for trial, Defence barrister Shauna Roe said David Casey was not in court as there was confusion over where he was being held and an adjournment was granted to next Tuesday. 

 

- Advertisment -

Must Read