logo
Former hurler 'lost it' and hit boy 'multiple times' with a stick, court hears

Former hurler 'lost it' and hit boy 'multiple times' with a stick, court hears

The Journal2 days ago
FORMER ALL-STAR and Clare All-Ireland winning hurler, Niall Gilligan 'lost it' when he hit a then 12 year old child 'multiple times' with a stick.
That is according to counsel for the State, Sarah Jane Comerford BL who told a jury at Ennis Circuit Court on Monday that Mr Gilligan 'lost control' on 5 October, 2023 when he punished the boy for the damage being caused at the time to his Jamaica Inn hostel property in Sixmilebridge.
Ms Comerford was making her closing speech in the case where Mr Gilligan (48) of Rossroe, Kilmurry, Sixmilebridge, denies the assault causing harm with a stick.
In his own closing speech, counsel for Mr Gilligan, Patrick Whyms BL said in no way is Mr Gilligan trying to suggest that he was entitled to punish the boy as was suggested and said that the injuries sustained by the boy 'are clearly regrettable'.
Mr Whyms said that on the evening at the Jamaica Inn hostel, Mr Gilligan 'didn't know that he was dealing with a child and did not create this situation'.
Mr Whyms said that Mr Gilligan 'was at the end of his tether' by the vandalism being done to a vacant property he was trying to sell.
Putting forward the defence of reasonable force against the charge of assault causing harm, Mr Whyms said that Mr Gilligan was at the Jamaica Inn hostel on the night of October 5th 'in the dark and believed that he was under siege'.
He said: 'Believing himself under threat and needing to protect himself and his property, Niall Gilligan needs to make an instant decision and so we are here.'
Mr Whyms (instructed by solicitor, Daragh Hassett) said: 'And Mr Gilligan, a family man who has young children and no previous convictions gives a clear story which has't changed and an entirely credible, fulsome account of what happened.'
Mr Whyms said to the jury: 'Did Niall Gilligan use such force as was reasonable in the circumstances as he believed them to be and if he did then no offence was committed.'
In his prepared statement at Shannon Garda Station in February 2024 on the alleged assault, Mr Whyms said that Mr Gilligan 'has given a perfectly plausible account in an otherwise impeccably accurate description of what occurred which placed the boys inside the building when he met them'.
On the medical evidence, Mr Whyms said: 'Nobody wants to see a child being injured and it would be much better if that didn't happen and the boy was injured in this case.'
He said: 'There doesn't seem to be much room for argument that he was injured from the actions of Niall Gilligan.'
Mr Whyms said that a displaced fracture of a finger on the boy's left hand 'is the only fracture in this case'.
He said 'There was mention of dislocated shoulders, broken tibias and broken wrists all over the evidence but none of those things happened.'
'There is an un-displaced fracture of a finger – that is not a good thing to happen but that it is what happened'
He said: 'There were injuries and there were sustained in the incident but by and large, most were cleared up in the week and the last one was pretty well cleared up in two weeks.'
Mr Whyms said that the injuries 'don't look nice on the photographs – there is no getting away from that and injuries that are photographed immediately after don't look nice'.
Earlier in her closing speech Ms Comerford (instructed by State Solicitor for Clare, Aisling Casey) told the jury: 'This is a story of a man who lost his cool.'
She said: 'Instead of picking up the boy after he slipped and bringing him out to his car and driving him home and telling his parents, he hit him and lost it and he was angry and frustrated.'
Ms Comerford said that the alleged assault in broad daylight 'is the action of a man who took out his anger and frustration on a child. There is no evidence that his injuries were caused by anything other than his interactions with Niall Gilligan.'
Advertisement
Ms Comerford said that Niall Gilligan 'lost control and punished the boy for the damage and inconvenience caused to his property on a morning when he had to clean up human faeces and urine from his property'.
Ms Comerford said that the evidence of the then 12 year old boy and his friend 'is credible and can be relied upon to the high standard beyond reasonable doubt'.
Ms Comerford said that the then 12 year old 'of course he knew that it not okay to explore a building without permission, to let off fire extinguishers, to remove keys so he would have access to the building again, but he was a 12 year old child and he was exploring and knew that others had been there before'.
Ms Comerford said that the boy 'thought Niall Gilligan would threaten him with a stick. He didn't think he was actually going to hit him, but he did and he kept hitting him'.
She told the jury: 'I would suggest to you that the boy was shocked and in disbelief that this could happen – that a grown man would hit a child and not once and not a clip around the ear and a kick up the backside followed by a drive home to tell his parents to say what the child had been up to'.
Ms Comerford said that the boy knew that Mr Gilligan 'was a big strong man who he never thought would viciously assault him'.
She said: 'You will recall him saying 'he was so big and I was so little' and Mr Gilligan was so big and the boy was so little.'
Highlighting the medical evidence, Ms Comerford said that the first medical report stated 'Head injury, loss of consciousness, bowel incontinence, right shoulder injury query, right posterior elbow wound? left hand and wrist injury, left tibia wound exposure and maybe fracture'.
She said: 'In the later reports, there is a reference to an X-ray to his tibia and fibula which was suggestive of a non-displaced fracture and ultimately it doesn't appear that this was a fracture.'
Ms Comerford said that 'it is understandable when you look at the photos why there may have been a query on fractures when you look at the level of bruising sustained by the body of the boy'
She said that the boy slipped outside the Jamaica Inn and was lying on his stomach 'and you can see clearly the marks on both buttocks, the wrist injury, the shoulder bruising, the arm injury and the bruising around the ribs and the gash to his shin bone when he was hit over and over again'.
She said: 'He lost consciousness for a while. He must have been hit multiple times in order to have sustained as many injuries as he did in the various locations you can see in the photos taken on the night and following day.'
She said: 'The only evidence you have on how those injuries were caused is the boy's video statement who said that he was hit with a stick a number of times before he was knocked out.
'The reason why he knew he was knocked out is that he didn't remember that he was dragged and also had incontinence… He can be forgiven for thinking that he disclosed his shoulder when you see the extensive bruising all around his shoulder.'
Ms Comerford described Ms Gilligan's prepared statement given to Gardai at Shannon Garda Station in February 2024 as 'a self-serving fabricated story to justify an encounter with a 12 year old child'.
Ms Comerford said that the account 'is purposefully vague' and 'I don't think you can believe anything that Niall Gilligan says about how he came to assault the young boy'.
Ms Comerford said in his statement Mr Gilligan says he got 'entangled in the dark and they fell on top of each other'.
Ms Comerford said: 'Mr Gilligan didn't fall and get entangled with the boy. He beat him there and he knew it. He lost control, he was angry and frustrated and he needed to cover all angles and that is why he said that to the Gardai.'
Ms Comerford told the jury that they should give greater weight to the evidence of the 12 year old boy and his friend who allowed themselves to be subject to cross examination from Mr Whyms on their evidence and 'withstood the cross examination'.
Ms Comerford said that due to the level of force used by Mr Gilligan in the assault, the defence of self-defence should not be available to him.
At the conclusion of the closing speeches Judge Francis Comerford commenced his charge to the jury. Judge Comerford said that he will continue his charge to the jury on Tuesday.
When Judge Comerford completes his charge, the jury will then commence their deliberations.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Hurler jury: 'What's the next step if we're not unanimous?'
Hurler jury: 'What's the next step if we're not unanimous?'

Extra.ie​

timean hour ago

  • Extra.ie​

Hurler jury: 'What's the next step if we're not unanimous?'

The jury in the assault trial of former Clare hurler Niall Gilligan, an All-Star and All-Ireland winner, is to continue their deliberations today. At Ennis Circuit Court, just before 5pm yesterday, Judge Francis Comerford sent the jury home to come back today and 'make a fresh start of it'. The jury deliberated for two hours and 47 minutes before returning with a question for the judge yesterday at 4.51 pm. Hurler Niall Gilligan. Pic: INPHO/Cathal Noonan The jury foreman asked: 'What is the next step if we are not unanimous?', to which the judge replied: 'There are various procedures which can kick in if juries are not unanimous, but they can only be taken at various points. 'It is always preferable that you try to reach a unanimous verdict – that is the idea, and it is better than any alternative. At 4.50 pm, I think it is appropriate that you break for the day and come back tomorrow [today] and make a fresh start of it.' He said if the jury is still not unanimous in its verdict after a while today, the position can be reviewed. Mr Gilligan, 48, of Rossroe, Kilmurry, Sixmilebridge, Co. Clare, denies assault causing harm with a stick to a then 12-year-old boy at the Jamaica Inn hostel, Sixmilebridge, on October 5, 2023. Hurler Niall Gilligan. Pic: INPHO/Cathal Noonan In his charge to the jury, Judge Comerford directed that if they are satisfied beyond all reasonable doubt that the first encounter between Mr Gilligan and the boy that led to the force being applied commenced and started outside the Jamaica Inn rather than in the corridor of the building, then they can't consider the lawful use of force as a defence. He also said that in the defence of self-defence, they should consider if the accused honestly believed he had to use force for the purpose of protecting himself from an assault or damage to his property. He said if the answer is 'no', the self-defence defence is no longer available. He said that if the answer is yes, then was the force used by the accused reasonable and necessary in the circumstances as he saw them? If the answer is 'yes' to that question, he said, 'then you must acquit'. 'If no, it wasn't reasonably necessary, well then he is guilty of the offence,' he added.

Armagh footballer to stand trial in the Crown Court on eight sex charges
Armagh footballer to stand trial in the Crown Court on eight sex charges

Extra.ie​

time2 hours ago

  • Extra.ie​

Armagh footballer to stand trial in the Crown Court on eight sex charges

Armagh All-Ireland winner Aidan Nugent was yesterday ordered to stand trial in the crown court, facing eight charges of sexual assault. Appearing at Armagh Magistrates' Court in Newry, the 31-year-old confirmed he was aware of the charges against him, which were alleged to have been committed in the US on November 17 last year. Aidan Nugent. Pic: INPHO/Leah Scholes A UK resident can go on trial in the UK for alleged foreign offences under certain circumstances. Mr Nugent faces seven charges of sexual assault and one of sexual assault involving penetration, alleged to have been committed against a single complainant.

Whether the abuse happens in Rathfarnham or west Belfast, the story is the same
Whether the abuse happens in Rathfarnham or west Belfast, the story is the same

Irish Times

time4 hours ago

  • Irish Times

Whether the abuse happens in Rathfarnham or west Belfast, the story is the same

Last weekend Máiría Cahill left a Belfast hospital bed and drove four hours to speak in the Galway Arts Festival 's First Thought series. As her interviewer, I expected moderate audience interest. It's been 15 years since she first went public in the Sunday Tribune about her alleged rape and abuse as a 16-year-old child by an IRA member and the heinous IRA 'investigation' which forced her to confront her abuser. Eleven years since a pivotal Spotlight BBC documentary on her case. Ten years since the former DPP for England and Wales, Keir Starmer, was asked to review the case and said he was sorry the Public Prosecution Service had let her down, soon followed by the NI Chief Constable's public apology to her and the other two victims after a shambolic trial. Seven years since the Northern Ireland Police Ombudsman revealed how as far back as 2000 CID and Special Branch had intelligence that her alleged abuser, Martin Morris - who had denied all wrongdoing - was abusing children and the IRA were investigating it. READ MORE Two years almost, since her book, Rough Beast: My Story and the Reality of Sinn Féin – described as 'shocking, important and unputdownable' by Roddy Doyle – was published. Yet such was the power of her quiet, measured, devastating delivery to a packed theatre on Saturday that the audience, visibly stunned, rose at the end to give her a thunderous standing ovation. To any other speaker, that visceral response would have been energising, but backstage she was drained to the point of speechlessness. It was a telling insight into the price that abuse victims continue to pay. Part of what continues to make her story so compelling after all this time, of course, is the involvement in that so-called 'investigation' of people with high status in the national political mainstream since that smart, funny 16-year-old girl was groomed, violated, isolated and often terrified for her life. She continues because she believes Sinn Féin leaders have never properly addressed the brutality of those investigations nor the generational reach of that savage misogynistic culture into the communities they ruled. But a larger part of her story is common to almost every case of abuse. It's in the context and the detail. The physical pain, confusion and humiliation, the gaslighting, the sudden shocking hostility of the family or tribe or institution closing ranks to protect itself, the urge to save other potential victims, the sense of a young, innocent mind and body being tested almost to destruction. One of the most agonising elements for any listener is the isolation invariably forced on the victims. No one is coming to help. It wasn't Cahill herself, but women – older Republican women – who 'reported' her complaints to the paramilitaries, despite the fact that they must have known the repercussions for her. Cahill – whose great uncle Joe Cahill founded the Provisional IRA – herself knew what happened to people who gave evidence against the IRA. The resulting sense of isolation for such a child is unimaginable, the damage unfathomable. How such children endure is a mystery. The case of the three remarkable Brennan sisters , Catherine Wrightstone, Paula Fay and Yvonne Crist, finally reached an endpoint in the criminal courts last week when the second of their brothers, Richard Brennan, was jailed for sexual offences against them in the 1970s and 1980s . They describe a childhood of suffocating fear: fear of unstable and violent parents, of their two abusive brothers, of revealing their terrible secrets to outsiders and not only jeopardising the family's reputation but Richard's aspirations for the priesthood, and fear of a wrathful God. In Máiría Cahill's case, her isolation was not rooted in fear of her parents – who still can't bring themselves to read her book – but rational terror of the larger tribe's vengeance. For the Brennan sisters in leafy Rathfarnham, Dublin, their isolation was about protecting reputations. When they tried to advocate for themselves they were failed at every level – by their parents, by the school, by the failure of state bodies to follow up. In 1984, when 12-year-old Catherine disclosed her abuse at Richard's hands to a trusted school connection, her parents were informed and raged at the child in disbelief. Family therapy meetings, organised following a referral by a hospital unable to diagnose the source of Catherine's lower limb disorder, were cut short by the parents. Lash marks on her body were noted by a teacher, but nothing was done. A poignant detail of the sisters' story all these years later is the harrowing internal battle common to many abuse survivors; that they should have found a way to speak out to protect others, even in the face of conditioning from the cradle. How do they endure? In that context it's important to remember the hundreds, maybe thousands, of vulnerable abused girls who are now no more than pawns in the Maga civil war over the Jeffrey Epstein files. Virginia Giuffre , the most prominent Epstein survivor who turned vocal anti-sex trafficking activist, was first abused by a family friend at the age of seven. Then at 15 while working a summer job at Mar-a-Lago was spotted by Ghislaine Maxwell and 'passed around like a platter of fruit' among her and Epstein's friends. Giuffre's multimillion dollar payouts from Prince Andrew, Maxwell and the Epstein estate brought no closure. Amid accusations of mental instability from her estranged husband – whom she accused of violent possessiveness – Giuffre lost custody of their children. She was just 41 when she took her own life in April. And of the long list of names associated with Epstein, Maxwell happens to be the only one serving time.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store