O'Donoghue is understood to have already initiated legal proceedings against two media organisations and is taking cases against others.

The 22-year-old's solicitor, Frank Buttimer, told the Sunday Tribune:

"Wayne was very damaged by the articles and whilst he accepts that what he did was quite wrong in regard to the death of Robert Holohan and subsequent events, he has been badly defamed by what was said about him in the days subsequent to his sentencing hearing in Ennis. He is prepared to meet any challenge mounted by any media organisations to his proceedings."

News that O'Donoghue intends to proceed with his legal actions comes just days after the Court of Criminal Appeal rejected a bid by the Director of Public Prosecutions to secure an increase in the four-year sentence imposed on O'Donoghue for killing his 11-year-old neighbour, Robert Holohan.

Holohan's parents, Majella and Mark, said they were disappointed by the ruling of the court and they postponed a press conference which was planned for last Thursday.

"I just want to say we are very disappointed today. Our thoughts are with Robert. We're very upset. We will talk later . . . our thoughts are with our beautiful little boy, " said Majella Holohan.

The Holohans are understood to be planning to hold their postponed press conference this Tuesday in Midleton, Co Cork.

The three judges of the appeal court ruled that the sentencing judge, Justice Paul Carney, had not made any error in law in imposing the fouryear sentence.

Lawyers for the DPP had argued the four-year sentence was unduly lenient on the grounds that Justice Carney had failed to take into account the disparity in age between Holohan and his killer, failed to have regard to the evidence of the injuries Holohan suffered, failed to take into account O'Donoghue's efforts at concealing the deceased's body and cover-up of the killing, and gave undue weight to O'Donoghue's guilty plea and co-operation with the gardai.

But these arguments were rejected by the three judges and their detailed 33-page appeal judgement was scathing of the manner in which Majella Holohan departed from her agreed victim impact statement to make allegations about her son's killer.

The judgement warned that any departures from an agreed statement could be taken into account by a judge and result in a less severe sentence.

It said that victim impact statements should only be permitted by a judge on strict conditions, including a stipulation that the proposed statement be submitted to the judge and legal representatives of the accused beforehand.

The judgement stated: "If in the course of making the statement in court they should depart in any material way from the content of the statement as submitted, they may be liable to be found to have been in contempt of court. If it be the case that such departure occurs and involves unfounded or scurrilous allegations against the accused, that fact may be considered by the sentencing judge to be a matter to be taken into account in mitigation of the sentence to be imposed."

Over 20 reporters crowded into the small Hugh Kennedy court room in the Four Courts last Wednesday morning for the appeal hearing, which lasted less than five minutes.

O'Donoghue sat with his head down as Justice Fidelma Macken read out the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeal that O'Donoghue's sentence would not be extended.

Buttimer said afterwards that his client was "extremely relieved and grateful" the criminal proceedings were over and the court had found his penalty was appropriate.