The commencement of Catherine Nevin’s trial generated unprecedented interest among the media and public. It was nearly four years from 19 March 1996, when Tom Nevin had been murdered. His wife Catherine now faced a jury of her peers, charged with his murder and three separate counts of soliciting William McClean, Gerry Heapes and John Jones to have him murdered. The courtroom was packed to capacity; even standing room was limited, and only available to those who had waited patiently for hours in the hope of gaining admittance. If those present expected to see a broken, miserable woman, they were sorely disappointed: Catherine had a steely determination to emerge unscathed, a winner in every sense.
The legal teams, both defence and prosecution, were rightly regarded as amongst the best in the land. Mr Peter Charlton SC, assisted by Mr Tom O’Connell BL, were the prosecuting team. Michael Kennedy was representing the Chief State Solicitor’s office. Mr Charlton is instantly recognisable in court because of the fact that he does not wear a wig. He lectured in law at Trinity College and is the author of much-used law textbooks. He is also an accomplished pianist and had to make a choice between law and music as a career.
The defence team was headed by no less a personage than the inimitable Mr Paddy McEntee SC, ably assisted by Mr Paul Burns BL and instructed by Garret Sheehan, solicitor. Mr McEntee is arguably the best-known barrister in the state. His expertise and abilities are legendary. He has represented many persons accused of some of the most notorious and heinous crimes ever committed in this country. Dominic McGlinchy and Malcolm McArthur immediately spring to mind.
Judge Mella Carroll had a spectacular and meteoric rise to her present position. As a barrister, she specialised in company law. She was the first woman to head the Bar Council and the first woman to be appointed a High Court judge.
The would-be jurors were packed like sardines into the confines of the courtroom, anxiously awaiting the result of the draw which would determine the part, if any, they would play in determining the guilt or innocence of Catherine Nevin. They were not there by choice, but as a result of a summons to attend for jury service. Those chosen would come to regard themselves as the unlucky ones, and would have their normal, everyday activities seriously curtailed for the duration of the trial.