Searches at pensioner’s home ‘not authorised’ Court of Appeal hears

Lawyers for Fionnghuale Mary Teresa Dympha Perry also claimed notes discovered at the house were for legitimate political and journalistic activities.

But the prosecution argued that an excuse offered by the 65-year-old for having the documents was “completely incomprehensible”.

Perry, of Waterville Street in the city, is seeking to overturn her conviction for the “security debrief” material stored inside a perfume box.

Earlier this year she was found guilty of collecting or making a record of information likely to be of use to terrorists following a non-jury trial.

She received a four-year sentence and is not due to be released from prison until January 2026.

Police found the documents in a spare bedroom at Perry’s home back in 2018.

The notes related to interviews carried out following seizures from Kevin Barry Nolan’s home in Ballymurphy, west Belfast in 2015.

Nolan was later convicted and jailed for storing Semtex, guns and bullets.

Prosecutors said the papers discovered in Perry’s house were a security debrief about the seized weapons to find out what went wrong and how police came to find them.

But at the Court of Appeal her lawyers maintained that she had a reasonable explanation for the notes based on her role as a journalist writing on political and security issues.

She was described as a commentator and activist, as well as a member of the far-left party Saoradh, engaged in lawful pursuits.

The original notes had been forwarded and then copied into her own hand without any knowledge that they contained information which could be used for terrorist purposes, according to her case.

Barrister Desmond Hutton KC insisted that Perry’s conviction was unsafe.

“The trial judge erred in finding sections of the appellant’s evidence to be untruthful,” he submitted.

In a further ground of challenge, counsel said evidence obtained from Perry’s home should have been excluded because the police raid was unlawful.

Under the terms of the Justice and Security Act 2007 any officers must be properly authorised before they can enter a house to carry out searches for suspected munitions or wireless apparatus.

But Mr Hutton argued that the inspector who signed the warrant failed to include the names of the officers in advance of the operation.

“The appellant says that the trial judge’s findings on the lawfulness of the search of her home were erroneous,” he added.

Responding on behalf of the Crown, Robin Steer challenged the credibility of Perry’s excuse for having the information.

“Her account for the notes she said had been hand-written was completely incomprehensible,” the barrister said.

Reserving judgment on the appeal against conviction, Lord Justice McCloskey indicated an intention to give a decision next month.