ACCUSED NAMED |
Sligo man (35) in court charged with possessing 13,000 child sexual abuse images
Judge lifts her previous order prohibiting the naming of the accused

Sligo Champion
Yesterday at 11:51
A 35-year-old man appeared before Judge Sandra Murphy at Sligo District Court on Thursday charged with possession of child sexual abuse images.
Gavin Flynn, Ballyscanlon, Grange, Co Sligo is charged that on July 2, 2019, at Sligo Garda Station he did knowingly have in his possession child pornography to wit, 13,078 images and 1204 videos on a Samsung Notebook.
He is also charged on July 5, 2019, at Sligo Garda Station that he did knowingly have in his possession child pornography to wit, 285 images and 58 videos on a HP Laptop.
He is also charged on July 2, 2019, at Sligo Garda Station that he did knowingly have in his possession child pornography to wit, 2248 images and 124 videos on a black Sony USB drive 4GB.
Judge Murphy, at an earlier court sitting, had placed a temporary prohibition order on naming the defendant.
At Thursday’s court, Mr Eugene Deering BL, instructed by Mr Mark Mullaney (solicitor) told the court that he was handing in an updated opinion regarding concerns for the real risk of a fair trial.
Mr Deering said the position was that the publication of the accused’s name would inevitably lead to trial by social media.
He said it would be impossible to correct at trial and also the commentary that would appear on social media.
He said also the panel of juries in Sligo is quite small and if the accused’s name is published, people would have to be living on the moon to not know what he is accused of.
He said this would put him at a real risk of having a fair trial and said it would be trial by social media.
Judge Murphy said she had listened to what Mr Deering had said and also read his very detailed submission.
She said she was satisfied and taking into account the law in this area that there was no evidence in front of her and that any risks that arise can be remedied by the trial judge.
She said she would not be continuing with the prohibition order.
