An arsonist jailed for the unlawful killing of a man whose apartment he set ablaze after a break-in has appealed his conviction, arguing that the deceased’s decision to re-enter the burning building after getting safe broke the “chain of causation”.
Dean Boland (37) broke into a downstairs apartment of a Dublin residential property where Ohari Viera was living. He stole a rucksack and set fire to the property.
Mr Viera had been living in an upstairs apartment with two other men, and all three managed to evacuate the building safely as soon as they became aware of the fire downstairs.
The men were waiting outside when Mr Viera went back into the house for an unknown reason. He never returned and others who tried to go into the property after him were prevented from doing so as the building became engulfed in smoke and flames.
‘I am a woman in my mid 60s and I’m having fun with a flirtatious man, but I’m worried he might want sex’
As Caoimhín Kelleher is primed for a £40m transfer, which other Irish players could move?
I have nothing against cycling, but spare me from speeding cyclists on country paths
American man Mike Kelley (53) confirms he was suspect arrested for questioning about Michael Gaine
The sentencing court heard that Mr Viera, who was originally from Angola, had “a complicated journey” in life which “ended sadly with his death”.
Boland of Northwood, Santry was convicted in December 2022 by a Dublin Circuit Criminal Court jury of the unlawful killing of Ohari Viera, damaging property by arson and burglary at Oaklands Terrace, Terenure, on August 21st, 2018.
He had pleaded not guilty to the offences and was sentenced to eight years in prison.
Counsel for Boland, Garret Baker SC, told the Court of Appeal on Monday that although the fire caused Mr Viera to flee the house, he then made a “free voluntary decision, tragically, to go back in”, leading to his death.
Mr Baker said that if Mr Viera had initially perished in the house fire, there would be no question of Boland’s culpability, but his decision to re-enter the blaze changes everything.
He said Mr Viera’s decision to go back into the burning building “breaks the chain of causation” that would make Boland responsible for his death.
In the original trial, counsel for Boland applied for the case to be withdrawn from the jury on the grounds that it was an exceptional case where there was no evidence of causation. This was refused by trial judge Elma Sheahan.
Mr Baker appealed Boland’s conviction on the grounds that Judge Sheahan was incorrect in her interpretation of causation and that she ought to have taken the decision out of the hands of the jury.
Séamus Clarke SC, for the State, said the issue of causation “is by its very nature a jury matter”.
He said the question of whether the immediate re-entry into the building by the deceased after escaping the blaze was sufficient to break the chain of causation was for the jury to decide based on the evidence.
Mr Clarke said that if the trial judge had taken the case out of the jury’s hands, it would have been an “unwarranted encroachment on the fact-finding role of the jury”.
He said that fire was the substantial cause of death and there was very little time between Mr Viera fleeing the building and re-entering.
He said Mr Viera’s death is still linked with the original actions of the defendant in starting the fire.
Ms Justice Isobel Kennedy, presiding at the three-judge court, said judgement in the case would be reserved.
