The daughter of murdered DJ Bobby ‘Mr Moonlight’ Ryan says killer Patrick Quirke’s latest appeal is the desperate action of “a mouse squealing in a trap”.
Yesterday it emerged that Quirke — who is serving life in prison for the June 2011 murder of Mr Ryan in Co Tipperary — has now been granted a chance to appeal his conviction before the Supreme Court.
And speaking exclusively to The Star, Mr Ryan’s daughter Michelle said she wasn’t shocked that Quirke was appealing again — but she firmly believes he will fail, and that this is only the desperate action of a guilty man.
READ MORE: Supreme Court agrees to hear appeal from 'Mr Moonlight' Patrick Quirke over murder conviction
She said: “I’m not surprised and in actual fact I’m loving the fact that he’s just there like a little mouse squealing in a trap.
“He’s lying there squealing and wriggling and doing his best to get out.
“But it’s not going to happen,” she said.
Quirke’s trial in 2019 heard that he murdered his ‘love rival’ Mr Ryan, a popular DJ known as ‘Mr Moonlight’ so that he could try and rekindle an affair with farm owner Mary Lowry.
Mr Ryan’s body was discovered inside a disused underground pit on Ms Lowry’s land in Fawnagowan, Co Tipperary on April 30, 2013 — and Quirke, who farmed the land, was later arrested and charged over the killing.
Michelle, who says she still carries the weight of her father’s loss with her every day, believes Quirke’s second bid at freedom will also fail.
The Supreme Court has determined that there are two matters of general public importance involved in the appeal which could arise in other criminal trials, and therefore it will benefit from clarification on the matter.
The issues relate to the validity of a search warrant and the Director of Public Prosecution’s discretion to call witnesses at trial.
In November last year, the Court of Appeal dismissed Quirke’s appeal against conviction on all 52 grounds.
Michelle says the lengthy trial, and the more than a year long wait for an appeal decision, shows that Quirke had ample time to prove his innocence — but two courts have now confirmed his guilty conviction.
“The judge in the original case gave plenty of time for both parties to thrash out the facts.
“He made his case and the jury found him guilty. I don’t believe he should be getting another chance to challenge that,” she said.
But Michelle says she and her brother Robert are prepared for Quirke to take his case all the way to the European courts.
“He won’t stop there,” she said. “He’ll take that wherever he can, including the European Court.
“He’s got nothing else to do. To be honest I’m actually embarrassed for the man,” she said.
Speaking about the continued grief she and her brother feels she added: “It never gets easier.
“We have a cross to bear and in actual fact it just gets heavier with time.
“My life has never been the same since it happened and I’ve been so wrapped up in it all for the last number of years now that I can’t really even remember what it was like.
“All we want to do is to remember and celebrate daddy, and not have to think about this man.”
It is believed that Quirke is set to challenge a Garda search of his home in his Supreme Court appeal.
Among the items seized with the warrant was a computer which formed a key part of the evidence against Quirke after it was found to have been used for internet searches on human decomposition and DNA.
Last year the Court of Appeal ruled that while the absence of a reference to computers was suboptimal it was not fatal to the validity of the warrant.
Quirke is also asking the Supreme Court to examine the discretion of the Department of Public Prosecutions to call certain expert witnesses in his trial.
Dr Khalid Jabbar, the former Deputy State Pathologist, had given an opinion that the death of Mr Ryan was the result of blunt force trauma.
Dr Jabbar had not attended the crime scene and was not available as a prosecution witness in the trial.
His report and findings were reviewed within the Office of the State Pathologist by Professor Marie Cassidy, the State Pathologist, and by two colleagues.
They were unanimously of the view that the cause of death was blunt force trauma, likely due to vehicular impact trauma.
Professor Jack Crane, the State Pathologist in the North, was also called in for an opinion for the prosecution.
He was also of the view that the cause of death was blunt force trauma.
However, Prof Crane did not believe that the evidence was there to support the conclusion of vehicular impact trauma.
The defence felt that in light of the differing opinions the prosecution should call both experts, Prof Crane and Dr Michael Curtis, on behalf of the Office of the State Pathologist.
The prosecution refused and the defence called Dr Curtis as a witness.
However the defence team later argued that the prosecution later “took advantage” of the situation to explore theories for which there was no evidential basis.
The Court of Appeal however ruled that while the manner in which the pathology witnesses were called was “sub-optimal” and “unusual” it rejected those grounds for appeal.
Get breaking news to your inbox by signing up to our newsletter.
