Murder accused meted out 'volley of violence' on 'drunken bowsie', court hears

The accused told gardaí in his interviews that he repeatedly punched his friend Juris Kokenbergs in self-defence after the deceased "came at" him, having drunkenly asked the defendant's mother for sex three times.

Alison O'Riordan

A murder accused meted out a "volley of violence" on a defenceless "drunken bowsie" when he was under no threat and had the intent to at least cause serious injury, a prosecution barrister has told the Central Criminal Court.

However, defence counsel asked the trial jury to return a verdict of not guilty of murder but guilty of manslaughter, asking the panel: "Where is the intent the prosecution suggest you grab onto and hold tight?"

The defence also queried how far the State's case that there was "extensive stamping" on the deceased's head was made out on the evidence.

Tomas Cypas (35), with an address at Foxborough Road, Lucan, Co Dublin has pleaded not guilty to murdering Juris Kokenbergs (49) at Old Bridge Park, Lucan, Co Dublin on October 28th, 2024.

The accused told gardaí in his interviews that he repeatedly punched his friend Kokenbergs in self-defence after the deceased "came at" him, having drunkenly asked the defendant's mother for sex three times.

"I didn't plan this, he is my friend," Cypas told detectives. He denied stamping on the deceased's head.

The trial has heard evidence that three areas of blood-staining with DNA matching that of Kokenbergs were found on the accused man's runner. The jury also heard there was "weak support" for the position that Cypas' footwear had made a pattern on the deceased's head.

In his closing speech to the trial, Conor Devally, prosecuting, told the jurors that a significant amount of alcohol had been consumed by Cypas, his mother and Kokenbergs by the late evening of October 26th.

He said the accused suggested his friend Juris "could barely sit up, let alone walk properly" before the deceased made "the utterances of a very drunk man".

At some point, counsel said, Cypas heard a drunk Kokenbergs, who could barely sit on his seat, say "something which was utterly untoward; the equivalent in Russian of suck my d**k" to the defendant's mother.

The barrister said Cypas had "lurried" his friend out of the kitchen following the "offensive words". He said the accused told gardaí he got "a blow of some sort and possibly an attempt to follow it through" from Kokenbergs, as he "manhandled" his friend.

What followed, counsel said, was a "volley of violence meted out" on the deceased.

Devally submitted it was the accused's case that he had acted in self defence. "One absence not there on the facts at all, nor is it there on the accused's account, was that Mr Cypas was in any way under threat from Mr Kokenbergs".

The lawyer added: "Mr Cypas was certainly under no threat of harm from a man who he was able to hit [up to], twelve times without any response".

"What did he think he was defending himself against? Mr Cypas tells us against a drunken bowsie, a man who was speaking offensively out of drunkenness and reluctant to leave and was acting up," submitted counsel.

Devally suggested that Cypas was defending himself against "a sloppy blow" that hadn't even hit him. "In order to be acting in self defence, he would have to believe it was necessary to use the force he did and that cannot be the case".

He submitted that while the pathologist could not say stamping on Kokenbergs head had caused his death, it was "part of the blows rained down on him".

Counsel said Cypas had inflicted "a battering" and an "appalling attack" with huge violence on his defenceless friend as part of a "speedy assault".

He said it was the prosecution's case that the "mark" on the deceased's head and blood splatter in the hallway of the house indicated an intention to cause serious injury, which was the requisite intention for murder.

In his closing address, defence counsel Brendan Grehan submitted that on his client's own account he had "lost it" in very quick succession, delivering a "flurry of punches" to his friend.

He said Cypas accepted he hit the deceased man and had never once sought to back away from it, "or put some sort of gloss on it".

He added: "The prosecution has sought to say to you there was extensive stamping. I wonder how far that has been made out in the evidence, particularly to the fact the prosecution has to prove things beyond a reasonable doubt".

Counsel suggested that the pathologist had been fairly unequivocal in her evidence, when she said that punching alone could have caused the "terrible injuries" suffered by the deceased.

"When the prosecution resorts to saying stomping, at most it is one impression of a shoe in this case". Grehan submitted that in contrast there is a "whole barrage" of evidence of repeated punching to the deceased's face.

Grehan said there wasn't a single fracture to the deceased's entire body, including his skull. "Where is the intent the prosecution seeks to suggest you grab onto and hold tight?" he remarked.

Counsel said Cypas had adopted a "very caring attitude" towards the deceased in the hope he may wake up and it would all be laughed at at another drinking session the following weekend.

"No indicator at all that there was any animus, bad feeling, motivation or premeditation of any shape or form for the accused to have it in for the deceased".

Grehan said the accused followed up by immediately picking his friend up, putting him on a sofa, covering him with a blanket, putting a pillow under his head and checking on him.

"There isn't the slightest of suggestions that the deceased was left there for him to expire or to deny him medical intervention. None of these are indicators of any kind of intent to cause serious harm".

He said their case is that Cypas had acted in some way in self-defence, but what was much more likely was that his client had "lost it" and hit his friend "in a flurry of punches", which did a lot of damage in response to his mother being insulted with a lewd comment.

This, he argued, was not a case of murder. "Murder is something you know when you see it and hear it and it is not the situation here; we are dealing with an unlawful killing".

The trial continues today before Justice Paul McDermott and a jury of eight men and four women.

More in this section