Former head of garda group was ‘profoundly distressed' by online harassment, court hears
Andrew McGovern, 38, of School Lane, Rathowen, Co. Westmeath, the man behind 'sinister' messages on Twitter, now X, was remanded on continuing bail pending sentencing by Judge Bernadette Owens at Mullingar District Court today.
McGovern pleaded guilty to a charge stating that he 'did distribute or publish a threatening or grossly offensive communication about Antoinette Cunningham with intent to cause harm.'
The offence occurred in the Mullingar area from 16 to 30 March, 2023, while she was still head of the AGSI.
The charge under section 4 of the Harassment, Harmful Communications and Related Offences Act 2020 carries a possible six-month sentence at the District Court level.
In November, McGovern failed to appear in court, resulting in a bench warrant for his arrest. He was later bailed again and a probation report was ordered.
Dressed in a green and hooded black tracksuit and white runners and wearing a facemask throughout the hearing, McGovern sat silently on with his arms crossed.
He will be sentenced on 4 September.
Detective Sergeant Alan Farrelly of the Garda National Bureau of Criminal Investigation outlined the facts.
He told the court that the first set of five direct messages was sent privately to the victim and made claims that she was his godmother.
He maintained his father had told him before he died, and he remembered her when he was a little toddler in the 1990s, saying 'God mum, are you annoyed with me?'.
Cunningham ignored the messages until she learned of a second set of 'more sinister' posts on his Twitter account about her and mentioning a person connected to her that were publicly accessible.
They contained unfounded claims that allegations had been 'all swept under the carpet' and that his life had been ruined forever.
When questioned by the detective sergeant, he never apologised and continued his story, even when various inconsistencies were pointed out to him.
Advertisement
He had one prior conviction for drink driving, which led to a road ban in 2008.
In a victim impact statement, Cunningham addressed the court.
She spoke out at her dismay at seeing 'blatantly false, vile, and completely shocking allegations' about her on social media.
They mentioned her job, which she believed was an attempt 'to try and deliberately damage and discredit me'.
Describing the posts as 'a demonstration of the very toxic side of social media,' she highlighted how the attacks violated her privacy and integrity, 'and my sense of personal well-being and peace of mind was fractured as a result of what happened'.
The court heard she could not fathom why somebody would choose to post disturbing messages about her and to continue doing it.
'I felt helpless to defend myself or to receive the expected support from the social media platform; there was a personal vilification of me going on, and I was powerless, at that point, to do anything about it.
'The messages had a profoundly negative effect on me, they were filled with hate, disinformation, offensive content, lies and basely offensive matters.'
Cunningham highlighted the added pressure of 'presenting a façade of normality' while dealing with the stress of the situation.
She emphasised the urgency of speaking out, and had strong words for the social media platform, adding: 'To this day, I find it deeply upsetting that something that is a criminal offence in this country is not accepted as a breach of social media rules here.'
Last year, Cunningham, from Limerick, announced her retirement after 33 years with An Garda Síochána and the AGSI.
She has since moved on to become an employer relations executive with the Irish Business and Employers Confederation (Ibec).
She made Irish policing history in 2018 when she became the first full-time female official in a Garda representative organisation and the first woman to serve at every executive level of the association.
Judge Owens noted a probation report on McGovern referred to the possibility of a psychiatric assessment.
However, she added that she was not going down that route because if McGovern was not going to engage with the process, it would be unfair to allow for no valid reason.
Defence solicitor John Quinn told the court he needed to consult with his client over the contents of the report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sunday World
3 days ago
- Sunday World
Donegal man (30s) to stand trial for alleged rape of woman
The man, who cannot be named at this stage of proceedings, appeared before Judge Ciaran Liddy at Letterkenny District Court A Donegal man in his 30s is to stand trial for allegedly raping a woman. The man, who cannot be named at this stage of proceedings, appeared before Judge Ciaran Liddy at Letterkenny District Court. He is charged with the alleged rape of a female on a date in September, 2023 at an unknown location in Co Donegal. . News in 90 Seconds - August 15th The charge is Contrary to Section 48 Offenses against the person Act, 1861 and section 2 of the Criminal Law (Rape) Act, 1981 as amended by section 21 of the Criminal Law (Rape) (Amendment) Act, 1990. Detective Garda Shaun Paul Barrett gave evidence of the arrest, charge and caution of the accused. The court was told that the Director of Public Prosecution had consented to trial by indictment and that time should be allowed for the preparation of a book of evidence in the case. Solicitor Alison Parke, of PA Dorrian Solicitors, requested legal aid and said her client was a suitable candidate. She also requested counsel in the case. Judge Liddy consented to the request and adjourned the case until November 10th next. Gardai said they had no objection to bail. Bail conditions included that the accused reside at a named address and that he had no contact either directly or indirectly with the alleged injured party or any witness in the case.
Irish Times
3 days ago
- Irish Times
Man charged over Cork burglary to apply for bail to care for elderly father
A man charged in connection with an aggravated burglary at a house in Cork on Monday has told a court he intends to apply for bail in order to care for his 85-year-old-father. Malcolm Kelly of Coolageala, Kanturk, Co Cork was charged with burglary with intent to commit criminal damage and assault, and with a count of criminal damage, at a sitting of Mallow District Court on Tuesday. Both alleged offences relate to an incident at Lagan Grove in Mayfield, Cork city, at 12.40am on August 11th during which three men entered a property armed with implements. The intruders confronted the occupants before fleeing. On Tuesday, Mr Kelly (39) was remanded in custody to appear before Cork District Court today for a bail application and Director of Public Prosecutions' (DPP) directions. READ MORE Mr Kelly addressed the court via video link today and described himself as being his father's 'carer'. He told Judge Monica Leech he was waiting on a letter from his doctor which relates to his forthcoming bail application. He spoke of his plan to apply for bail when he is next before the court in order to take care of his 'very elderly 85-year-old father.' Sgt Gearoid Davis said gardaí were awaiting directions on the case from the DPP. Defence solicitor Diana Halloran indicated that her client was consenting to a two-week remand in the matter. Mr Kelly was remanded in custody to appear before Cork District Court on August 29th. The Garda Press Office previously indicated that a man in his 30s was transferred to hospital by ambulance following the incident at Lagan Grove on Monday. A technical examination was carried out at the scene. Investigations are ongoing.
Irish Times
3 days ago
- Irish Times
Manager sacked after ‘joke' sext on colleague's phone gets reduced WRC award
A tribunal has made a reduced award for losses from unfair dismissal to a manager sacked after he admitted taking a colleague's phone and sending her husband a 'sexually explicit' text message as 'a joke'. In an anonymised decision just published, the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) upheld a complaint under the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 against the man's former employer after concluding it was 'too extreme' to declare that the man's conduct was 'at the high end of sexual harassment'. He said he was being made the 'fall guy' for a workplace culture of 'sexual comments and innuendo' at the financial services company as he pleaded to its board to be let keep his €60,000 a year job, the tribunal heard. The tribunal heard that in January 2024, the complainant took one of his direct reports' mobile phones from her desk and sent a 'sexually explicit WhatsApp message to her husband', which the other worker, Ms A, found out about as she left to go home. READ MORE The complainant 'owned up' and claimed it was 'meant to be a joke', the tribunal noted. Ms A raised it with the CEO of the organisation as soon as he returned from leave, telling him she and her husband considered the message 'vulgar and disgusting'. The text of the message was not included in a WRC decision document published on Friday. The CEO called the claimant to a meeting and suspended him with pay a week after the event, the tribunal heard. The tribunal noted the evidence of the CEO that another senior employee, Ms B, who came to the suspension meeting as a witness, remarked afterwards: 'I can't believe this is happening again.' The CEO told the tribunal he had forgotten about a previous similar incident involving the same manager in September 2022, and told Ms B: 'If we're to do anything about this, I need it documented.' Ms B later wrote a letter of complaint setting out that she had left a personal device in the company's finance office when she went on holiday in September 2022 so a colleague could use a banking app installed on it, the tribunal heard. While she was away, the man had posted 'two sexually offensive messages' on her social media account, the complaint letter stated. Ms B made contact with the manager and told him not to use the banking app, as she feared the phone was 'hacked'. The complaint letter set out that the complainant 'pretended to be serious at first, and then he began laughing and [said] he had posted the messages as a joke', the tribunal heard. Ms B wrote in her complaint letter that she was 'extremely annoyed', but after arranging with the CEO for a dedicated mobile phone for the finance office, took the matter no further. Michael Kinsley BL, appearing instructed by Daniel O'Connell of Kean's Solicitors in the matter, told the Commission the company had failed to examine the position advanced by his client about the 'culture and behaviour of staff in the organisation', which he said had been 'treated dismissively' at all stages. Mr Kinsley said the investigation was 'biased and prejudged' and the decision to dismiss 'wholly unfair and disproportionate'. Lauren Tennyson, for the company, instructed by Sarah Conroy of Beale & Co, said the employer took the view that the external investigator had made 'extremely serious' findings at the 'higher end' of sexual harassment and that the complainant's behaviour 'warranted dismissal for gross misconduct'. Adjudication officer Catherine Byrne wrote in her decision: 'I do not wish to minimise the impact that the incidents had on the two employees,' she wrote. However, she noted that the complainant and Ms B remained friends after the September 2022 incident, while Ms A had stated she had 'just kind of got on with things'. She considered it reasonable that both women would be angry, embarrassed and shocked at the complainant's behaviour, and that it amounted to sexual harassment. However, the conclusion reached by the company investigator that it was a 'high severity of sexual harassment' was 'too extreme' a view, she wrote. She considered it unfair that the employer included the 2022 incident with Ms B's phone in its probe 'to bolster a case for the dismissal of the complainant', having taken no action about it at the time, she wrote. Ms Byrne also found there were 'serious failings' with the process followed by the employer. They 'failed in their duty to properly consider the complainant's defence' – having spent at most 20 minutes considering the worker's position before deciding to dismiss him. Ms Byrne upheld the complaint of unfair dismissal and awarded the worker €22,500 in compensation. She wrote that this was 30 per cent of his estimated losses of €73,500, calculated on the basis that the claimant was out of work six months and was now earning €314 a week less than he had with his former employer.
