Stardust inquest jurors told they must be unanimous as they consider verdict
Is Deaths When A Out Of Have Must The Questionnaire Died They Coroner Two On The They Of Told Each Details General Second Jury Would One Who Their Died Is Where, They And Of Kinds For The 48 Fill On The Provide One How And Questionnaire Circumstances
The jury has retired to consider its verdict in the landmark Stardust inquests, having been told they must be unanimous in their findings as they consider the circumstances of the deaths of 48 people.
“I am now sending you to deliberate on the findings I wish you to return on these inquests,” Dublin District Coroner Dr Myra Cullinane said.
“This is where the focus is on you. To sit on the jury brings with it great responsibility. You must approach your task in an objective manner based on the law and the facts you have heard in evidence. You must be dispassionate and clinical in your approach.”
The 12-person jury, which was reduced from a 13-person jury as required under law at this final stage, was told it had five options open to them when reaching their verdicts for those who died in the Stardust disaster.
These are accidental death, misadventure, an open verdict, a narrative verdict and unlawful killing.
Unlawful killing was a verdict counsel for families of the victims urged the jury to return in their closing statements.
Dr Cullinane said, for the jury to return a verdict of unlawful killing, they must be satisfied “beyond reasonable doubt” on the criteria she set for them.
In the early hours of February 14, 1981, a fire quickly swept through the popular Stardust ballroom in Artane, north Dublin, where hundreds of young people had gathered for a disco dancing competition. Forty eight young people died in the tragedy.
After sitting for almost a year, the Stardust inquests are drawing to their conclusion from the Pillar Rooms on the grounds of the Rotunda Hospital in Dublin.
This fresh examination into the circumstances of the 48 deaths from the Stardust fire came after a long campaign from families of victims.
After summarising the evidence last week, coroner Dr Myra Cullinane made it clear that under the rules of inquests there was no question of casting blame or exonerating anyone in these findings or verdicts.
“No person can be named in your finding or verdict as being responsible for the deaths in the Stardust, as that would clearly be in breach [of the legislation],” she said.
The coroner repeated this point at numerous stages throughout her address.
She told the jury they would have two kinds of questionnaire they must fill out. One is for each of the 48 who died and provide details on where, when and how they died. The second questionnaire is a general one on the circumstances of their deaths.
Dr Cullinane discussed the different verdicts available to the jury. She said for accidental death and misadventure, they were verdicts that could be reached if the jury satisfied this was the case “on the balance of probabilities or more likely than not”.
On the latter option, she said if the jury were to decide the fire “broke out accidentally but there were risk factors present which caused or contributed to the deaths in a significant way”, it could lead to them returning a verdict of death by misadventure.
For a verdict of unlawful killing to be returned, she outlined the tests which they would have to apply to reach this conclusion.
“You must find that there has been a failure by a person or persons to a very high degree to observe such a course of action as experience shows to be necessary if substantial injury to others is to be avoided,” she said.
“And that such failure was a substantial cause of a death.”
At the close of proceedings, lots were drawn to determine which juror would depart at this stage and not play a role in considering the verdict. When that individual was chosen, he received a round of applause from the families of victims, having sat through the 122-days of evidence.
The jury is expected to resume deliberations after Easter, before returning their verdicts.