Court rejects appeal by Cork mother who harassed doctor
Marlies Walsh pleaded guilty to one count of harassment at Temple Street Hospital, Dublin. She had no previous convictions. Picture: Collins Courts
The Court of Appeal has rejected a bid by a mother to set aside her plea of guilty to the repeated harassment of a doctor who was working at the hospital where her son was awaiting a kidney transplant.
Marlies Walsh, representing herself at the three-judge court, argued that she was given ineffective assistance by her lawyers and was under duress when she entered the guilty plea as she had to prioritise her son's care. She also argued that the investigation into her offending was flawed because no recording was made of an interview she gave to gardaí.
In November last year, Ms Walsh pleaded guilty to harassing the doctor in 2018 and 2019 and was given a fully-suspended two-year sentence.
Walsh, 51, of Pedlars Cross, Clonakilty, Co Cork, pleaded guilty to one count of harassment at Temple Street Hospital, Dublin. She had no previous convictions.
Dublin Circuit Criminal Court heard that Walsh contacted the doctor and others at the hospital by phone and email over a period between December 2017 and August 2020 as she wanted to work as a patient advocate. Her son, now in his early 20s, was a kidney transplant patient at the hospital.
Judge Elma Sheahan in the Circuit Court said Walsh had engaged in “repeated harassment” of the doctor and every effort had been made to get Walsh to stop her behaviour before a formal complaint was made to gardaí.
Judge Sheahan imposed a two-year sentence, which she suspended on strict conditions. She also barred Walsh from communicating with the doctor or approaching his residence or place of work for 20 years.
Delivering the appeal court's judgment, Mr Justice John Edwards noted that within one week of the trial, Ms Walsh underwent tests to see if she could be a kidney donor for her son. While he said that this "must have been an extremely stressful time for the appellant, there is no suggestion that she entered her plea of guilty on an uninformed basis."
He said that she had not offered "any cogent evidence that her will was so overborne by the undoubted stress that she was under that she was in truth coerced into pleading and that her plea was not a voluntary one."
She provided no medical evidence or affidavit to support her claim, he said, adding: "Such limited information as she has provided concerning the basis of her complaint suggests that, notwithstanding that she was highly stressed, she fully understood what she was doing, in circumstances where she was legally represented and had been advised as to her options."
He said there was no suggestion her lawyers or anyone else had exerted undue pressure on her or sought to coerce her to plead guilty.
Her decision to plead guilty so she could get back to her family is "not duress in the legal sense such as might justify the setting aside of her plea of guilty," Mr Justice Edwards said.
The judge also rejected the complaint regarding alleged inadequate representation by counsel. He said there is no evidence that her lawyers were instructed to apply for an adjournment and refused to do so or that she was unable to give instructions or that her instructions were not followed. There was also no evidence or suggestion she didn't understand the advice she was given.
Mr Justice Edwards said that one interpretation of Ms Walsh's complaint is that she has "developed post-transactional regret for having pleaded".
Her complaint regarding the quality of the garda investigation, the judge said, would have been an issue for trial and is not relevant where she had decided to plead guilty. Ms Walsh will appeal the severity of her sentence at a later hearing.
