Teen tells court he ‘heard sound of wood smacking off pal after he saw hurling ace Niall Gilligan go to hit him'
At Ennis Circuit Court today, the teenager said that a 'horrible thing happened to my friend' when recalling the alleged assault of his then 12-year-old friend on October 5 2023 at the Jamaica Inn hostel in Sixmilebridge.
Mr Gilligan, 48, of Rossroe, Kilmurry, Sixmilebridge denies the assault causing harm with a stick of the boy at the Jamaica Inn hostel, Sixmilebridge on October 5 2023.
The two 12-year-old boys had been exploring the abandoned Jamaica Inn hostel after 5pm on October 5.
Mr Gilligan owned the Jamaica Inn hostel at the time and the jury has been told that in the days leading up to October 5, it had been broken into and vandalised.
Under cross examination via video link from a room at Ennis courthouse on Thursday afternoon, the now teenager said that in his interview with Gardai in November 2023 he said that he saw Niall Gilligan hit his friend.
Read more in News
At the trial on Thursday the teenager said that he didn't see Mr Gilligan hit his friend.
He said: 'I saw him go to hit him, I misphrased that. All I could hear was the sound of wood smacking off my friend.'
He said: 'I said I saw him go to hit him - I didn't see him hit him.'
The teenager said that his friend was 'tiny' at the time when he was attacked.
Most read in Irish News
The teenage witness told counsel for Mr Gilligan, Patrick Whyms BL, instructed by solicitor, Daragh Hassett, that as his friend slipped as they were running away from Mr Gilligan, 'I saw Niall coming at him with the stick about to swing at him'.
He said: 'We were both running away and he attacked my friend when we were both running in the opposite direction to him.'
The teenager disagreed with Mr Gilligan's version of events that the altercation with his friend took place inside the building.
In his November 2023 video evidence with a Garda specialist interviewer played earlier to the jury on Thursday the now teenager said his father later showed him a photo of Niall Gilligan later that evening on October 5 and the boy confirmed that the man who attacked his friend was the accused.
In the video interview carried out on November 11 2023, the witness said that as the two boys left the building and came around a corner, they saw 'a tall, kind of strong looking' man holding a stick and they both ran.
Asked how he felt by the specialist Garda interviewer, the boy said 'terrified' and added 'but I just got out of there as fast as I could, all I could think was 'get out of there' and I did'.
The boy described the man as 'fit looking like, gingerly brown kinda hair'.
He said: 'I seen him playing hurling when I was younger and he played for the Bridge and Clare.'
The boy told Gardai Mr Gilligan is an auctioneer in Sixmilebridge.
Asked about his friend's screaming, the boy said: 'I heard him shouting, like I heard him screaming like telling him to stop. My friend telling him to f*** off and to leave him alone, that was about it'.
The boy hid in a nearby industrial estate and he said that felt relatively safe 'but I was still very scared that somehow he could have seen me'.
A short time later, the boy said that he saw his friend come around the corner 'and he was limping like he was holding his arm, holding his hand, holding the wrist he broke and it was all swelling up'.
The boy said that his friend was 'looking in pain, he had lots of mud all over him'.
The boy told Gardai that his friend 'was very shaky, obviously he felt very, very scared and in a lot of pain'.
He said: 'I was just supporting him to walk up, just like holding him up…I put my arm around his back so I could support him so he could have one of his legs off the ground so it would be easier for him to walk."
The boy said that his friend "said 'it just hurts everywhere' is all he said'.
The boy said that his friend told him 'go home because if he sees you, he is going to get you as well'.
The jury also heard from witness for the State, Linda Quinn from Sixmilebridge who runs the local GAA club shop.
She said on her way into the club on the evening of October 5, she noticed a child near the gate and that something did not look right.
She told the court: 'I just said are you okay, he said no.'
She went on to say how the boy asked her if she thought his hand was broken. 'It was very swollen'.
He then showed her a 'big gash' on his leg and asked her opinion.
When Ms Quinn asked him what happened, he told her he had fallen off his bike.
He went on to ask her to look at his arm, where there was another deep gash.
Ms Quinn told him he might need to get stitches. At this, the child got upset and Ms Quinn offered to give him a lift home.
Shortly afterwards, they arrived at his house, and after speaking to the boy's aunt, Ms. Quinn returned to work.
The trial continues on Friday before a jury of seven men and five women.
1
Former Clare hurler Niall Gilligan at Ennis Circuit Court
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Journal
5 hours ago
- The Journal
Gardaí appeal for witnesses after attack on man by group of youths in Tallaght
GARDAÍ ARE APPEALING for witnesses to an assault on a man by a group of youths in Tallaght over the weekend to come forward. The incident happened in the Parkhill Lawn area of Kilnamanagh in Tallaght, Dublin 24 at around 6pm on Saturday evening. The Indian man, who is aged in his 40s, was falsely accused of inappropriate behaviour and assaulted by a group of youths. He was stripped of his pants and underwear by the gang during the attack. Jennifer Murray, who lives in the area, said she and others came upon the man after the incident and helped him to receive treatment in the immediate aftermath. The man was subsequently brought to Tallaght University Hospital for treatment. Garda sources said they're satisfied the man was not behaving inappropriately and was wrongly targeted. Advertisement The incident has been condemned by a number of politicians. Gardaí said they are appealing to anyone who may have witnessed the assault to come forward. They are appealing to road users and pedestrians who may have camera footage, including dash-cam footage, of the incident, and who was travelling in the area between 6pm and 7pm on Saturday to make it available to them. 'Anyone who observed any unusual activity and/or anyone with information is asked to contact Tallaght Street Garda Station on (01) 666 6000, the Garda Confidential line on 1800 666 111, or any Garda Station,' a garda spokesperson said. The spokesperson added: 'An Garda Síochána is appealing to people to not post or reshare social media content including footage related to this incident in order to protect the privacy of the victim involved.' Investigations into the matter are ongoing. Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone... A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation. Learn More Support The Journal
Irish Times
7 hours ago
- Irish Times
Omagh bombing survivor wants High Court to compel State to hold public inquiry into atrocity
Two people directly affected by the Omagh bombing want the High Court to compel the Irish government to establish a public inquiry into the atrocity. Emmet Tunney, who survived the 1998 dissident republican bombing, says the Government is obliged to establish a public inquiry in circumstances where state authorities allegedly held 'actionable intelligence' relating to the attack. Mr Tunney's case states that a public inquiry is required to ensure an effective investigation of the atrocity. He alleges the State's failure to hold such an inquiry is a breach of his rights under the Constitution and under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). According to Mr Tunney's court documents, article two of the ECHR requires an 'effective, independent, prompt, and public' investigation in circumstances where state agents knew or ought to have known of a real and immediate risk to life. READ MORE Articles 40 and 41 of the Constitution require effective investigations of deaths involving potential state failures, his papers say. Shawneen Conway, whose 18-year-old brother Gareth was killed in the bombing, is seeking to bring an action similar to Mr Tunney's, the High Court heard on Tuesday. A total of 29 people, including a mother pregnant with twins, died and hundreds were injured when a car bomb planted by the Real IRA exploded in the centre of the Co Tyrone town on August 15th, 1998. An independent inquiry into the bombing established by the UK government opened in Omagh in January and is continuing. That inquiry is examining whether the atrocity could have been prevented by UK authorities. In the High Court on Tuesday, Ruaidhrí Giblin, for Mr Tunney, sought an early date for his application seeking the court's permission to bring the case. Ms Justice Mary Rose Gearty said she would hear Mr Tunney's and Ms Conway's applications for court permission next week. Mr Tunney, from Omagh, Co Tyrone, is seeking an order compelling the Government to establish a public inquiry into the bombing and he wants a court declaration that the Government's failure to establish such an inquiry to date is in breach of his rights. He wants to bring his case against the Government, Ireland and the Attorney General. His case claims some of the perpetrators of the bombing are believed to have operated within the Republic of Ireland. He alleges there were failures in intelligence sharing and co-operation between Irish and UK authorities before the bombing. Authorities in the Republic may have had prior knowledge of the Real IRA's planning, his documents claim. Mr Tunney also argues an Irish government inquiry is required in circumstances where there are limitations on the jurisdiction of the UK government's inquiry. For example, he says, the UK government cannot make findings as to whether Irish authorities are culpable for a failure to supply information relating to the bombing. In the UK Omagh bombing inquiry, its chairman, Lord Turnbull, heard arguments over the last two days regarding applications from some survivor and family groups seeking to be represented by special advocates. They said their interests should be represented in closed hearings and they raised a risk of damage to confidence in the inquiry if they were not. However, a lawyer for the UK government said no statutory public inquiry has had special advocates to date and there was no justification to have them in this case. Katherine Grange KC also contended no provision was made for such appointments in the 2005 Inquiries Act and she cautioned around avoiding unnecessary costs. At the conclusion of the hearings around special advocates on Tuesday, Lord Turnbull said the issue raised is 'important and interesting'. He will provide a written decision 'in due course'. – Additional reporting PA
Sunday World
8 hours ago
- Sunday World
Jury in Niall Gilligan trial asks judge 'what is the next step if we are not unanimous?'
At Ennis Circuit Court just before 5pm on Tuesday, Judge Francis Comerford sent the jury home 'to come back tomorrow to make a fresh start of it'. The jury of seven men and five women in the assault trial of former All-Star and Clare All-Ireland winning hurler, Niall Gilligan are to continue their deliberations on Wednesday. At Ennis Circuit Court just before 5pm on Tuesday, Judge Francis Comerford sent the jury home 'to come back tomorrow to make a fresh start of it'. In the case, Mr Gilligan (48) of Rossroe, Kilmurry, Sixmilebridge denies the assault causing harm with a stick of a then 12 year old boy at the Jamaica Inn hostel, Sixmilebridge on October 5th 2023. The jury deliberated for 2 hours and 47 minutes on Tuesday when the jury returned to court with a question for Judge Comerford at 4.51pm. After the jury took up their seats in the jury box, the jury foreman asked: 'What is the next step if we are not unanimous?' In reply, Judge Comerford said: 'There are various procedures which can kick in if juries are not unanimous but they can only be taken at various points." He said: "It is always preferable that you try to reach a unanimous verdict - that is the ideal and it is better than any alternative." Judge Comerford said: 'At 4.50pm, I think it is appropriate that you break for the day and come back tomorrow and make a fresh start of it." Judge Comerford said that if the jury is still not unanimous in its verdict after a while on Wednesday, the position can be reviewed. Judge Comerford told the jury: 'You have had a lot of information the past couple of days and before that.' They jury commenced their deliberations at 12.33pm on Tuesday with a break for lunch and before they commenced, Judge Comerford told them that they should make their decision in the case 'after a cold, direct, forensic determination of the facts'. Judge Comerford told the jury that what they have to decide is was there an assault and is it not an assault because of a lawful excuse. In his charge to the jury Judge Comerford directed 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 two storey Jamaica Inn rather than in the corridor of the building, then they can't consider the lawful use of force as a defence. Judge Comerford also told the jury in the defence of self defence they should consider did the accused honestly believe that he had to use force for the purpose of protecting himself from an assault or damage to his property. Judge Comerford said that if the answer is 'no', the defence of self defence is no longer available to the accused. 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. He said that if the answer is 'yes' to that question 'then you must acquit. If no, it wasn't reasonably necessary, well then he is guilty of the offence.' Judge Comerford said that the jury can only apply this test if they are satisfied that the first encounter was inside the two storey building. Judge Comerford said that both child witnesses in their video interviews and under cross examination in the case said that the first encounter with Mr Gilligan was outside the building. Judge Comerford asked the jury that they should ask what would the gain be for the child witnesses saying that when they both admitted that they were earlier in the building. In his closing speech to the jury on Monday 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 (instructed by solicitor, Daragh Hassett) 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, 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 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." Earlier in her closing speech on Monday, Ms Sarah Jane Comerford BL (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.' 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'. The jury continues their deliberations on Wednesday. Niall Gilligan at Ennis Circuit Court News in 90 Seconds - July 22nd
