‘I didn’t mean to kill that girl’- wife of Ashling Murphy’s killer tells court

The court heard how the accused’s brothers ultimately conceded they heard him admit to harming a woman and how their wives were instructed to burn clothes he was wearing during the murder

The wife of the man who murdered Ashling Murphy admitted to Gardaí how he told her: “I didn’t mean to kill that girl.”

Dublin’s Central Criminal Court heard details on Tuesday of Lucia Istokova telling Gardaí that she was “scared” to tell them about her husband Jozef Puska’s clothes being burned following the murder – and of his need to get out of their home in Lynally Grove, Mucklagh, Co Offaly on the night.

Ms Murphy, 23, was brutally stabbed to death by Puska while out for a run at the Grand Canal in Cappincur, Tullamore, Co Offaly, on January 12, 2022. On Tuesday, Ms Istokova was being sentenced alongside Puska’s brothers Lubomir, 38, and Marek, 36, as well as their wives, Viera Gaziova, 40, and Jozefina Grundzova, 32.

The court heard how the brothers ultimately conceded they heard Puska admit to harming a woman and how their wives were instructed to burn the clothes he was wearing during the course of the murder. Ms Murphy’s parents, sister and brother were present for the hearing.

Presiding Judge Caroline Biggs was told that the court is awaiting victim impact statements from the family of Ms Murphy and therefore she made the decision not to impose sentences on Tuesday. However, the court heard that Puska’s wife and brothers are facing a maximum penalty of five years in prison – while the brothers’ wives face a maximum of ten years’ imprisonment.

The court heard extensive details of what Puska’s partner Lucia Istokova, who is the mother of his children, told Gardaí in voluntary statements in the days following the murder. It also heard how she has not been able to explain to her children what happened – and of her wish for them to be sent to the Czech Republic if she is jailed.

The court heard that Ms Istokova provided five voluntary statements to Gardaí from January 14 to January 19, 2022. Prosecuting Counsel Annemarie Lawlor SC told the sentencing hearing that Isokova was specifically charged for withholding information pertaining to her partner’s return home on the night of January 12 with “visible injuries,” that he admitted to killing or seriously injuring a female, that he owned a bike found at the scene and that he had travelled to Dublin that evening.

Ms Lawlor confirmed with Detective Superintendent Paddy O’Callaghan that Istokova was asked about her partner having any injuries – and in her first interview told them “no”. “I was already in bed, I was nearly asleep,” she told Gardaí, adding that Puska “didn’t tell anything”.

She was subsequently shown pictures of the bicycle recovered at the scene and said she did not know if it was her partner’s. She also said she did not know if he travelled to Dublin that night. Ms Lawlor told the court that Puska’s partner “effectively maintained a similar position” in subsequent interviews, but ultimately did describe seeing “certain injuries” on Puska.

In a voluntary interview on January 17, Ms Istokova described to Gardaí putting clothes in a bag and told them she was “in shock in relation to what was occurring,” the court heard. She described to Gardaí seeing “scratches” on her partner during this time. She described “caring for her children during this period”, but again maintained that nothing was admitted by her partner in relation to the killing of a female.

In her fourth interview, Ms Istokova made a disclosure that her partner “told me he didn’t mean to kill that girl” and that he “needed to get out of here”. Ms Istokova told Gardaí that Puska told her she needed to mind the children and “he said something like ‘she is dead'”.

Asked during her interview why she hadn’t previously disclosed matters such as the bike, Ms Istokova told Gardaí she was scared. She also said she was scared to tell Gardaí about the burning of the clothes that were worn by Puska during the period he killed Ms Murphy. The court heard that Ms Istokova had pleaded guilty before the trial in which the other defendants had pleaded not guilty, and were ultimately convicted by a jury in June of this year.

Colman Fitzgerald SC, Defending for Jozef Puska’s wife – Ms Istokova – said her probation report finding that she was “evasive”, was at odds with the conclusions of her psychological report which found her literacy is limited and that she “demonstrates difficulty articulating” and identifying her emotional state.

The psychological report found her to be of no risk in terms of re-offending, Mr Fitzgerald said. Ms Istokova has considerable difficulties articulating her feelings about matters, he said.

“She has stressed that she knows what she did was wrong, she accepts what she did was wrong and that is why she pleaded guilty,” Counsel said.

She felt an “immense weight off her shoulders” when she told the truth and understands the severity of her crime, he added. Her children were first and foremost in her mind, Counsel said, and she is now raising these children on her own.

The psychological report references potential difficulties that the children face, Counsel said. She has not explained to them why their father is absent, despite them going to visit him, he told the court. She is trying to “safeguard them” and that “may or may not be wise Judge,” Counsel said. She had stated that she had believed her husband had been a good father to her children.

It was put to his client that Puska was not the man she thought he was and she was “taken aback” by this. The Defence also told of the expectations of his client – including that she cook for the family living in the home in Mucklagh. Mr Fitzgerald also told the court that it is his client’s wish that her children go and live in the Czech Republic if she is jailed.

The court also heard details of the Garda interviews with Puska’s brothers and their wives and how admissions were made. Ms Lawlor told how Marek Puska made two voluntary statements to Gardaí on January 14 and 18, 2022. He initially denied that admissions were made to him by his brother at the house in Lynally Grove, and said there was no arrangement to burn his clothing.

In a further statement on January 18, he made an incremental disclosure that he did see his brother with visible injuries on the 12th, and that he had made admissions to him about wanting to “kill himself”.

He alleged that his brother told him he had swung at his hand with a knife and that in the course of trying to kill himself, a woman shouted at him to not harm himself – and he scratched her. He said he asked his brother if he killed the woman and he said “I don’t know”.

The court heard that Lubomir Puska also provided voluntary statements, in which he initially said he had not seen his brother since Wednesday. He subsequently, in a voluntary statement on January 16, indicated to having lied in his first interview, the court heard.

He went on to admit that he had seen Jozef return to the house with visible injuries. “He kept repeating nothing happened, it’s ok,” he told Gardaí.

The court heard that in another interview on January 18, Lubomir disclosed to Gardaí that his brother did make admissions to him. He said Puska told him he was “stabbing himself,” and that he saw a girl exercising, she approached him and he “must have cut her then”.

The court heard that this was the first time that Lubomir Puska had acknowledged this. Viera Gaziova, the court heard, was also interviewed on five occasions, and told Gardaí that Lubomir had told her that Jozef told him that “he maybe killed someone”.

She set out to Gardaí communications she had with her husband Lubomir, who she said told her that “clothes must be burned”. He had stated to her that Jozef had told him this. The “instruction” to burn the clothing worn by Puska came from persons in Dublin, the court heard. Ms Gaziova said that Lubmor told her that Jozef had asked her to make sure the clothes were burned.

The court further heard that Ms Grundzova told Gardaí during the interview that she and Ms Gaziova burned the clothes. She also indicated that Marek told her that “Jozef killed the girl” and said of burning the clothes: “We were told to do it, so we just did it.” She told Gardaí that “later on I knew it was wrong”.

The clothes were not recovered by Gardaí, the court heard, having been completely destroyed – and evidence was found that the ashes were disposed of down the sink.

Meanwhile, Paul Murray SC, defending Ms Grunzova, told the court that his client wants to issue her “sincere and deepest apology” to the Murphy family “for her actions on the day in question,” and her “extreme regret and remorse for what she did”.

He told the court that she is a mother to six children and a psychological report found she is “at times overcome with emotion in relation to her position,” and that she “isolates herself” but is nonetheless “determined to remain strong in front of her children”.

She had expressed concern, if she received a custodial sentence, about how her children would get on without their mother. The court heard the children’s grandparents had indicated they would look after the children.

Mr Murray said his client lived in a house with 20 people and there were certain cultural expectations of someone such as her and she “did not have any life whatsoever outside of the family home”.

Karl Finnegan, SC for Marek Puska, described the dynamic of family culture that seems to arise in this case. He was in a long-term relationship from a young age with his partner, who he met in the Czech Republic when he was 18 years of age. They had two children in Slovakia, had a third child in the Czech Republic and had three further children when they moved to Ireland in 2013.

Mr Finnegan said in relation to the culture aspect: “It’s certainly similar to what most of us would aspire to in terms of our own family.” He said it appears their goal as parents was to prioritise their children’s education and for them to have lives. He asked the court to consider that in terms of being a credit to his client.

The psychological report described him as “candid about the in depth effects,” he said and his client was at the time of offending under “high stress” and there was fear for the family. He acted “irrationally, under pressure,” he said and his frame of mind at the time was in relation to his concern for himself, his family and his brother.

He said the report shows that his client has “significant anxiety,” abuses his pain medication at times, and how his culture can frame the issue of decision making. He also acknowledged that his trial caused the Murphy family stress.

He has no previous convictions, the court heard and has not come to the attention of Gardaí since, the court heard. Mr Finnegan said he is asking the court to consider that time served in custody is considered more difficult for a foreign national.

Kathleen Leader SC, defending Lubmor Puska, said her client “identified the Murphy family as the main victims in this case,” and that he acknowledged the “trauma” they had suffered.

He is originally from Slovenia and is a member of the Rina group, she said. He left school at around 15 or 16 and moved to the Czech Republic before moving to Ireland in 2015. He has three children in full-time education in Ireland, she said. She asked the court to take into account his explanation for not telling Gardaí that his brother returned home on the night in question.

“My client was faced with a very extreme and possibly unique situation on the night when his brother came home,” she said. She said her client lived very closely with her brother in a home where they had the expectation that life would be better. This was not an excuse she said but certainly “explains his behaviour on the night”.

She asked the court to take into account her client’s cooperation during the course of the Garda search of the house on January 14, and that he “gave An Garda Síochána a significant amount of information about their family, about what Jozef was wearing,” and that he clearly identified his brother’s bicycle.

Counsel for Ms Gaziova said his client understands the seriousness of her offence and the impact on Ms Murphy’s family. Her probation report found she has low risk of re-offending, he said.

Judge Biggs adjourned the matter to another date when victim impact statements from the Murphy family are expected to be read in court.

Judge Biggs adjourned the matter to October 22.

For all the latest news, visit the Belfast Live homepage here and sign up to our daily newsletter here.