The Crown Court judge presiding in a non-jury trial concerning an incident in the Pitt Park area of east Belfast will give a ruling on the case after Easter.
Stephen Matthews (62) and 60-year old co-accused Derek George Lammey have both been charged with unlawful assembly, affray and intimidation dating back to February 2021.
Both Matthews from Meadow Park in Ballywalter and Lammey of Hill Crest in Bangor have denied all three charges.
The charges relate to an incident in the east of the city when a crowd of around 40 masked and hooded men gathered in Pitt Park then walked to the Ballymac Centre.
It’s the Crown’s case that both Matthews and Lammey were part of the “threatening and intimidating group” who approached the centre which was occupied by woman and children.
Those inside the centre included the wife and daughter of murdered local man Ian Ogle.
During the trial held at Belfast Crown Court, several police officers who were in the area on the day in question gave evidence.
The officers told the court that despite the two accused being masked, they identified both Lammey and Matthews via height, build and gait.
Regarding Lammey, one constable said the accused spoke to him as he passed him as part of the group and that he recognised his voice and his eyes.
After the Crown concluded its case on Thursday, barristers acting for both defendants launched a legal application on the ground their clients have “no case to answer”.
Joseph O’Keeffe KC, representing Lammey, told Judge Kerr there was insufficient evidence and spoke of the “inherent weakness” of the recognition evidence.
Pointing out that none of the officers who gave evidence were gait analysists, Mr O’Keeffe said the officer who claimed he could identify Lammey from his eyes was unable to provide an eye colour.
Matthews’ barrister, John Larkin KC, also spoke of insufficient evidence regarding the alleged identification of his client.
Mr Larkin also made the case that there was no evidence to substantiate the three charges faced by the two accused.
Regarding the affray, Mr Larkin said this charge incorporated groups of people fighting and in this case “that simply didn’t happen here – not remotely”.
Judge Kerr refused to grant the defence application and following this, he was informed by both Mr O’Keeffe and Mr Larkin that the two defendants would not be giving evidence.
As no further evidence was called by the defence which signalled the end stages of the trial, Judge Kerr asked both the Crown and defence to lodge any further submissions in writing.
He listed the case again for mention next Monday then said he would give his judgement on the trial after the Easter break.