Introduction

The burden of alcohol and other drugs on the criminal justice system is complex to quantify. Data availability, the difficulty in classifying offences according to the role alcohol and/or other drugs may have played, and the uncertainty of a cause-and-effect relationship all complicate the narrative. However, an extensive body of evidence has consistently shown significant and definite associations between alcohol and other drug use and rates of criminal offences.

Global evidence estimates that over 50% of perpetrators had been drinking prior to the offence committed.1 A systematic review and meta-analysis found that drug users were 3–4 times more likely to commit a criminal offence than those who do not use drugs.2 Irish data from the Probation Service found that one-half of clients (53%) committed an offence while intoxicated, or that alcohol was in some way associated with the offence, and similarly so for other drug use (48%).3

Given these statistics, alcohol and other drug use places considerable pressure on the financial resources of the State and demands on the criminal justice system. A 2021 report published jointly by the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform and the Department of Health calculated that approximately €87 million is spent annually on problem drug use collectively within hospitals and prisons, and by the criminal justice system in dealing with the medical and legal consequences of drug use.4 A report published in 2010 calculated that alcohol-related crime cost the State €1.2 billion in 2007.5 These calculations do not consider the human costs, from victims of alcohol- and drug-related violence, to public disorder contributing to people’s fear of crime.6-8

The District Court

The District Court is the frontline of the judicial system in Ireland and it deals with a wide variety of cases that impact on local communities.9 Irrespective of the extent of the crime allegedly committed, all criminal prosecutions within the catchment area are initially heard before a District Court judge. This article reflects observations from one day in the District Court in a regional Irish town, highlighting how substance use affects both the legal system and society.

Before court proceedings began, a candid discussion with the judge provided some insight: ‘I would say that between 80% and 90% of all cases before me involve drugs or alcohol in some way.’ The judge went on to say that, day in, day out, he witnesses first-hand how alcohol and other drugs are ‘ruining their lives, and the lives of others’. In his 20 years on the bench, he increasingly fears for public safety as the situation is ‘getting progressively worse’.

Before the doors were opened to the public and those waiting for their case to be heard, a number of hearings were presided over in camera (in private) remotely from Wheatfield Prison and Cloverhill Remand Prison. The first case was for a charge of ‘drunkenness’ where the male defendant appeared via video link from Wheatfield Prison and was sentenced to a term of imprisonment.

Following the remote hearings, the courtroom filled to capacity. Parents accompanied juveniles, interpreters attended to translate for those for whom English is not their first language, members of An Garda Síochána took their seats, and legal representatives connected with their clients. Sixty-two case numbers and the corresponding names were called out and the defendant and their legal representative came before the judge. (Of the 62 cases, 14 were no-shows and a bench warrant was issued for the arrest of the relevant individuals.)

Of note were the 12 cases specifically involving alcohol: drink driving (n=7), drunkenness, and public disorder where alcohol was specifically mentioned (n=5). A further seven cases specifically involved drugs: drug debt intimidation and extortion, possession for distribution or personal use, and driving while under the influence of drugs.

A significant number of other cases mentioned the involvement of alcohol and other drugs; these included domestic violence where drug use was mentioned as a contributory factor, an alleged assault/serious harm while under the influence of cocaine, and a case of arson where alcohol was cited as a defensive explanation.

Legal representatives described the personal circumstances of many of the defendants, asking the judge to consider backgrounds of addiction, deprivation, experience of juvenile detention, and/or mental health issues. 

Notable cases

In a drink driving case, the judge read out the details of the case, including that the defendant had been driving with his wife and three young children in the car and was initially being cautioned for speeding when it transpired that he was intoxicated. The judge verbally reprimanded him for his actions and issued a fine. Later, a 20-year-old male appeared on drunk and disorderly charges. The court heard that on the night he was arrested, the accused was intoxicated in a public place and several members of the public had alerted An Garda Síochána. When approached, he was abusive towards the Gardaí and had a blade in his possession. The court also heard that this was the second instance of the same charge for the accused.

Two defendants appeared together before the judge for a plethora of charges, including serious harm/assault, threats to kill, threat to damage property, alleged harassment, and demanding money with menaces in the case of an alleged drug debt. The court heard that the defendants had already obtained €24,000 from the victim over a 12-month period and the judge ordered the case to go to trial under the Criminal Procedure Act, 1967.

One case involved a 49-year-old male who was appearing in court due to a theft charge. The court heard that he stole an energy drink worth €3 while intoxicated, became abusive towards staff in the shop when approached, and that this resulted in An Garda Síochána being called. He was issued a €250 fine.

In another case where the accused was before the court on two separate charges, being drunk in a public place and driving while disqualified, his legal representative told the judge that the defendant has ‘alcohol problems’; the judge replied by saying that the defendant is ‘married to alcohol and with the trouble it is getting him into, he should file for a divorce from alcohol’.

Later in the afternoon a number of Transition Year students from a local school attended to observe the proceedings. The judge spoke directly to them and warned them of the ‘lifelong consequences of drug use … don’t just take my word for it, go into the [courthouse] cells and see for yourself and listen to proceedings today … you can ruin your future’.

Conclusion

Among the cases before the court, the burden of drug- and alcohol-related offences, be it directly or indirectly, was evident. However, considering the limited information given in court, the real involvement of alcohol/drugs is likely to be higher. The multitude of people and the variety of cases reflect diverse backgrounds but also reveal a cycle of crime and addiction, along with a larger social issue of deprivation.

Prior to the start of proceedings, the judge had spoken of the dilemma he faced daily of the need to balance community safety and a need for recovery support: ‘I have two options in my role. Send to prison or send back to the streets. Neither is right.’ He called for more treatment alternatives that support the individual, giving them a chance to recover.

Given the evidence from one single day in his court it is hard to argue against this investment in prevention programmes and addiction services to both ease the burden on the judicial process and further the betterment of communities.

1    Graham K, Leonard KE, Room R et al. (1998) Current directions in research on understanding and preventing intoxicated aggression. Addiction, 93: 659–676.

2    Bennett T, Holloway K and Farrington D (2008) The statistical association between drug misuse and crime: A meta-analysis. Aggress Violent Behav, 13: 107–118.

3    Rooney L (2021) Informing & supporting change: drug and alcohol misuse among people on probation supervision in Ireland. Dublin: Probation Service. Available from: https://www.drugsandalcohol.ie/35133/

4    Bruton L, Gibney S, Hynes T, et al. (2021) Spending review 2021. Focused policy assessment of Reducing Harm, Supporting Recovery: an analysis of expenditure and performance in the area of drug and alcohol misuse. Dublin: Government of Ireland. Available from: https://www.drugsandalcohol.ie/34729/

5    Byrne S (2010) Costs to society of problem alcohol use in Ireland: a report for the Health Service Executive. Kildare: Health Service Executive. Available from: https://www.drugsandalcohol.ie/15781/

6    Dolan P and Peasgood T (2007) Estimating the economic and social costs of the fear of crime. Br J Criminol, 47: 121–132.

7    Manthey J, Hassan SA, Carr S, et al. (2021) What are the economic costs to society attributable to alcohol use? A systematic review and modelling study. Pharmacoeconomics , 39: 809–822. Available from: https://www.drugsandalcohol.ie/34203/

8    Jiang H, Doran CM, Room R, et al. (2022) Beyond the drinker: alcohol’s hidden costs in 2016 in Australia. J Stud Alcohol Drugs, 83: 512–524.

9    Courts Service. The District Court, Ireland. More detail on the work of the District Court is available from: https://www.courts.ie/district-court (accessed 20 Dec 2024).