Chapter 25: The Defence
JJ Muggivan
In his closing argument, Brendan O’Donnell’s defence counsel, Patrick MacEntee SC, drew the attention of the jury to the fact that one of the doctors involved in the commitment of Brendan O’Donnell to Ballinasloe Mental Hospital had expressed the view that Brendan was schizophrenic. However, the hospital had discharged him two weeks later, having made a provisional diagnosis of personality disorder or paranoid ideation.
Counsel pointed out that this provisional diagnosis had been made in late 1992, which was approximately a year and a half before the events of April and May 1994.
Brendan had been administered the drug Triptasol at the age of four and Largacty]l at the age of fourteen. Counsel argued that as a schoolboy, Brendan was already showing signs of developing schizophrenia.
Patrick MacEntee argued that at the time of the killings, Brendan was suffering from hebephrenic or disorganized schizophrenia. This had caused him not to know the nature or quality of his acts. He said that his client did not know his actions were wrong and, even if he did know, his mental illness would have prevented him from stopping himself from committing them.
Brendan’s defence counsel urged the jury to find insanity as Brendan’s motivation in committing the killings. He pointed to his client’s physical condition as he sat in court, and described his life of contact with mental-health professionals, from the age of four. After he had been discharged from Ballinasloe Mental Hospital, Brendan had gone to Britain where he had reportedly been arrested in Edinburgh in March 1993, in relation to a theft that had occurred two years previously. By the time he returned to Ireland a year later, Brendan had been in three young offenders’ institutions and two hospitals. His defence counsel recounted Ann Marie’s description of Brendan O’Donnell telling her on 26 April 1994 of having hazy eyes and of seeing things in front of his eyes.
Patrick MacEntee described Brendan’s actions of the following days as not being the actions of a sane man. He emphasised that his client had apparently taken Imelda Riney from her home in broad daylight in her car which was familiar to the people of the area. Brendan had burnt Imelda Riney’s car and had also driven around for a while in Fr Walsh’s car before burning it too.
According to the defence counsel, the action of openly carrying around a gun while there was a major garda search was not indicative of the actions of a sane man. The action of placing Liam
Riney’s body beside that of his mother was also interpreted by counsel as a curious act — an act of returning the child to his mother.
Patrick MacEntee attributed Fiona Sampson’s survival of her ordeal to her intuitive knowledge of how to deal with a lunatic. He argued that there was no evidence that his client took pleasure in killing. He suggested that while Brendan did tell shallow, silly lies, he did not tell the lies of a cold, calculating and sane killer. He pointed to the testimony of three psychiatrists who had given the opinion that Brendan suffered from schizophrenia and the testimony of all of the doctors, whether for the state or the defence, who had stated that schizophrenia was a major mental illness
Did Patrick MacEntee come close to identifying Brendan O’Donnell’s most serious health problems when he pointed out that his client was grossly overweight from drugs, with his tongue lolling to the side of his mouth, and his fingers coated with nicotine?
Did non-mental-health professionals, such as Patrick MacEntee SC, Mary Quinn, Ann Marie O’Donnell and Fr Neylon come close to describing diseases identified by Dr Peter Breggin in his book, Toxic Psychiatry?
In his book, Dr Breggin suggests that drugs such as those which Brendan was taking, rather than treating a disease, can actually create it. He writes that ‘the drug reaction can get completely out of hand’ and that the result can be a disease that is similar to a type of encephalitis. Such a disease would have symptoms including ‘lobotomy-like indifference’, fever, sweating and heart problems. In severe cases, those affected could become delirious, fall into a coma and die.
Some affected people might apparently make a complete recovery only to slip suddenly backwards months or even years later. Some might develop Parkinson’s, while others might become psychotic or develop dementia, symptoms of which might include ‘silliness, erratic moods, difficulty focusing attention, wandering speech, disconnected thoughts, talking too directly in the listener’s face...
Dr Breggin writes:
The profession of psychiatry now agrees that the drug-induced neurological disorders do become permanent in a large percentage of patients. In addition, there is growing incontrovertible
evidence that permanent psychosis and dementia also are frequent outcomes. (Breggin, Toxic Psychiatry)
If the patient ceases to take the medication, the nervous system cannot cope and there may be psychotic symptoms and even greater anxiety and anguish. Therefore, patients who are trying to come off such drugs require emotional and social support, and professional supervision.
There is a risk that withdrawal symptoms may develop, and these could range ‘from insomnia and hyperactivity to hallucinations and delusions’. Moreover, the patient will still ultimately be left having to deal with their original emotional problems.
Dr Breggin writes that, ‘for the control of unwanted behavior’, medication is often given to children in institutional care, including ‘facilities for delinquents’. Children treated with drugs such as those with which Brendan was treated may become fidgety and very anxious, thus requiring ever larger doses of their medication which was originally prescribed to deal with those very symptoms.
The psychiatric care Brendan received was criticised at the end of the trial, and the then Minister for Health, Michael Noonan, ordered an inquiry into how psychiatric services had dealt with him. The inquiry was never carried out.
Brendan O’Donnell’s painful experience was not yet over, though.