Jury reaches a verdict in trial of Laois resident for Roscrea killing

Court Reporter

Reporter:

Court Reporter

court

Criminal Courts of Justice Dublin

A 48-year-old woman has been cleared of murdering her boyfriend but found guilty of his manslaughter by stabbing him in their Tipperary home.

The mother of two had asked for an acquittal on a number of grounds, including the possibility that he had ‘come towards the knife’ she was holding while they fought.

Inga Ozolina (48), originally from Latvia, but with an address at Old Court Church, Mountrath, Co Laois, has pleaded not guilty to murdering Lithuanian native Audrius Pukas at The Malthouse, Roscrea on November 20, 2016.

The Central Criminal Court heard that the 40-year-old father of two died at the scene from a stab wound to his chest. He had also sustained two other knife wounds in the incident.

The trial heard that the couple had a volatile relationship, which was violent at times.

The Central Criminal Court heard that the 40-year-old father of two died at the scene from a stab wound to his chest. He had also sustained two other knife wounds in the incident.

The trial heard that the couple had a volatile relationship, which was violent at times.

Witnesses gave evidence of seeing her with various injuries in the past, and she had obtained two safety orders against him. However, these had lapsed at the time of his death.

She told gardai that domestic violence had been an ongoing problem in their relationship and that she had been in a women’s shelter.

“My life is just a living hell,” she said. “The safety order didn’t stop him assaulting me over and over again.”

She had his number saved under ‘Sadist’ in her phone.

She said that she was preparing dinner around 1am on the day of the incident, having worked a late shift. She said that they had begun arguing over him having friends over and drinking in the apartment while she was at work.

She explained that he had then begun throwing pictures of her children into the fire before turning violent.

She said that he had pulled her hair, pushed her towards the floor and begun hitting and biting her. Photographs of her injuries, including two bite marks, were shown to the jury.

She said that she had grabbed the closest thing with which to defend herself, a big kitchen knife.

She added that her doctor had previously suggested that she have something sharp handy with which to defend herself ‘just in case’. However, her doctor testified that this had not happened.

The accused said that she and the deceased had continued to struggle and that he had flinched. She said that she was surprised when he suddenly stopped and let her go, as ‘normally when he gets violent, he hits me to the end’.

She said that she washed a few things in the kitchen sink, including the knife. She said she hadn’t realised that it had cut him or that there was blood on the blade.

She said that she then followed him downstairs to check on him, because ‘once he starts on me, he never retreats so easily’.

She said that he was lying on the floor, breathing very heavily. She said she thought that he was having a seizure because he had asthma, so she used an inhaler on him.

“Then I realised there was blood,” she said.

She said that, after trying First Aid, she ‘chased’ to the garda station.

The jury saw CCTV of her pulling up in her car and entering the station in her dressing gown and slippers.

A garda gave evidence of her first words to him that morning.

“I’ve killed my boyfriend, come quick, come quick,” she’d said. “I stabbed him. I pushed the knife into him, come quick.”

It was put to her in interviews that this was the truth, and not her account of the knife accidentally cutting him during the struggle without her knowledge.

She denied washing the knife to get rid of DNA evidence, which was still found. Despite the knife being clean when seized from the cutlery drawer, microscopic analysis found specs of blood matching her boyfriend’s on the blade.

Caroline Biggs SC, defending, asked the jury to consider a number of grounds for acquittal.

“Ultimately, you’ve to consider whether there’s a reasonable possibility that the cause of the fatal wound was him coming towards the knife, a reasonable possibility she was acting in justifiable self-defence, or a reasonable possibility that she didn't have the intention to kill or cause serious injury,” said Ms Biggs. “On any of the three, she’s entitled to acquittal.”

Paul Murray SC, prosecuting, asked the jury to find the accused guilty of murder.

He said that the three knife wounds to Mr Pukas could not constitute an accident.

“This was not a situation of self-defence either,” he suggested. “Even if you pay credence to the account given by Ms Ozolina of what happened, at the end of the day, it was she who had the knife used on an unarmed, drunken man.”

Mr Justice Alexander Owens gave the jury a third option, one of finding her not (NOT) guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter. He said that this could arise if the jury was satisfied that she had acted in excessive self-defence, or didn’t have the necessary intent for murder.

The seven men and five women began deliberations on Friday afternoon. They had spent just over 12 hours in their jury room trying to reach a unanimous verdict before returning to say they had reached an impasse.

They were then given the option of reaching a majority decision and returned a few minutes later with a 10-2 majority verdict of not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter.

Justice Owens refused an application for continuing bail and remanded the accused in custody for sentencing on 1st July.