Kathleen Funchion speaks out after ex partner jailed over coercive control
MEP Kathleen Funchion has spoken of her hope of making more people aware of coercive control after her former partner was jailed yesterday for offences under the Harassment and Harmful Communications Act.
Sean Tyrrell of Cypress Grove, Loughboy in Kilkenny received a four-month prison sentence, with a separate four-month prison term suspended for a period of two years, for offences under Section 4 of the Act which is also known as Coco's Law. The 39-year-old appeared before a sitting of Kilkenny Circuit Criminal Court yesterday.
Advertisement
In an interview with KCLR Daily with Brian Redmond this afternoon Ms Funchion said that control was a very serious issue in her relationship with Mr Tyrrell.
'Right up until the end of the relationship, he had to have the control of the situation. And I think that's something that can happen very subtly. People don't see it happen. You don't wake up one day and realise that you're potentially in a controlling situation.
'It happens over time, and it kind of happens in a way that makes you doubt yourself and makes you wonder am I seeing this correctly? Am I picking this up correctly? It really makes you feel like you're actually going a bit crazy. And I think that that can be some of the reason that people don't see the situation that they're in.'
The Sinn Fein MEP said that Tyrrell accessed her phone and contacted 'very good lifelong friends of hers".
Advertisement
'People that knew me long before I was ever in politics. I suppose my most trusted circle and he was alleging all sorts about their lives. Contacting their partners alleging they had been unfaithful.'
She stated that her former partner was always accusing her of infidelity.
'That (accusing her of being unfaithful) was a constant. He wanted me to do this lie detector test. That was in 2022. Honestly, I was considering doing it. And that is why I wanted to speak out. To say to other people that you can be in these situations. You don't see it creeping in and eventually you realise 'what am I doing here? This is not normal.'
'I was in two minds on whether to speak about this. Obviously for me this is three years going on. I do feel like I really want to try and reach out to other women potentially in this situation.
Advertisement
"It is difficult when you are in the public eye and you talk about (things like) policy debate …but this is very personal and people sometimes question your motivation.
"It all came to a head in August 2022. Up to that point I was always holding out hope that things could be resolved.'
Ms Funchion described her experience as 'isolating' and said that she was lucky to have had support from her friends and family.
' I feel unbelievably grateful that my friends stood by me in that situation because that was a very difficult situation for them.'
Advertisement
Victim impact statement
Meanwhile, in her victim impact statement in court yesterday Ms Funchion said that her former partner 'always had to control the narrative' and "did everything in his power to continue this until the very end".
'The impact that this has had on the rest of my life is that my life has become a very lonely and isolated place where I have issues trusting others. I do not allow people into my life, I question everyone's motivation that is around me and I can become incredibly paranoid. It is very difficult to have to say this aloud but it is the reality of my life now.
"It is something that will stay with me forever, the worry, the upset and at times to this day the disbelief of what has happened, will never leave.'
Ms Funchion said that "when it comes to trust, no matter what time has passed, you will always have the scar".
Advertisement
The court heard that Tyrrell first got to know Funchion when he assisted on her Dáil election campaign in 2016. He later took up the seat she vacated in Kilkenny County Council taking up the local authority seat she vacated after she became a TD.
They entered a romantic relationship which lasted several years. Ms Funchion and Mr Tyrrell got engaged in December 2017 and Tyrrell began working in the constituency office of his partner.
WhatsApp messages
The court heard that Tyrrell insisted on having access to Funchion's phone and accessed her WhatsApp messages without her knowledge.
In August of 2022, after the couple had broken up, Tyrrell contacted a journalist outlining false information of domestic violence and financial abuse by a Sinn Féin politician.
He sent a screengrabs of this correspondence to Ms Funchion and threatened to provide the reporter with her name if she did not agree to a number of demands. The demands included taking a lie detector test and setting up a meeting with party leader Mary Lou McDonald.
Tyrrell also threatened that he would contact the spouses of a number of Ms Funchion's close friends to claim they had been unfaithful in their marriages if she did not comply with his demands.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scotsman
4 hours ago
- Scotsman
Charity begins with honesty among staff
Debbie McIlwraith Cameron on strengthening public trust in charities Sign up to our Scotsman Money newsletter, covering all you need to know to help manage your money. Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... It is a criminal offence to act, or continue to act, as a charity trustee if you are disqualified under the Charities and Trustee Investment (Scotland) Act 2005 and you may be liable on conviction to imprisonment, a fine or both. With such consequences, charities must have a working knowledge of the disqualification criteria. Existing criteria: You cannot be appointed, or continue to act, as a charity trustee if: (i) you have an unspent conviction for an offence involving dishonesty or under the 2005 Act; (ii) you are bankrupt/sequestrated; (iii) you have granted a Protected Trust Deed/entered into an Individual Voluntary Arrangement; (iv) you have been removed by a court from being a charity trustee, or (v) you have been disqualified from being a company director. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Disqualification is determined before appointment, and if a trustee's personal circumstances change, they are under a duty to disclose this, as their appointment must automatically cease. Charities must employ due diligence when it comes to employee backgrounds, says Debbie McIlwraith Cameron While you may have to rely on information provided in good faith, there are publicly available methods to carry out due diligence, e.g. OSCR's searchable Record of Removed Persons on its website. Exemptions: An individual may apply for a waiver from OSCR for a specific charity, a type of charity or charities in general. Each case is considered and decided on its own merits. OSCR lists the variables and supporting evidence it will consider in its guidance. Some disqualification criteria are time-sensitive. Automatic disqualification because of a conviction, bankruptcy and a Protected Trust Deed only exists while they remain unspent and undischarged. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The changes: The implementation of the Charities (Regulation and Administration) (Scotland) Act 2023 extends disqualification criteria in two ways. The automatic disqualification list will now include being convicted of the following offences: terrorism, money laundering, bribery, perverting the course of justice, wilful neglect of duty by a public official/misconduct in public office and sexual offences. The key change is that the criteria will now extend to employees/volunteers holding a role with 'senior management functions' within the charity, as well as charity trustees. The 2023 Act defines 'senior management function': (i) if the function relates to the management of the charity and the individual is not accountable to anyone higher within the charity, except the charity trustees (e.g. the Chief Executive role), or (ii) if the function relates to the control of money, and the only person the individual is accountable to (except the charity trustees) is someone else exercising a senior management function other than to do with the control of money (e.g. Finance Director). In guidance published by OSCR, the regulator is clear that an individual's role/job title is not the deciding factor; you must consider the function the individual undertakes. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Practical implications: Before the extensions are implemented later this summer, charities should undertake due diligence to ascertain whether any of the current trustees would come under the extended criteria and update any appointment/induction policies, and consider if any of their employees/volunteers carry out 'senior management functions' and if they must cease to act. Trustees may wish to add the potential consequences of automatic disqualification (e.g. loss of the Chief Executive/Finance Director, trustee numbers being below the minimum) and mitigation methods (e.g. due diligence, ability to re-deploy within the organisation) to the charity's risk register. If an automatic disqualification event were to occur, depending on the circumstances, it would be advisable to seek HR/employment advice.
NBC News
11 hours ago
- NBC News
Judge orders Trump administration to provide due process to some migrants deported to El Salvador
A federal judge today ordered the Trump administration to provide hundreds of migrants sent to CECOT, a maximum-security terrorism confinement center in El Salvador, habeas relief, ordering the government to provide the individuals an opportunity to challenge their detention and removal under President Donald Trump's invocation of the Alien Enemies Act. The order applies to all noncitizens removed from U.S. custody and transferred to CECOT "on March 15 and 16, 2025, pursuant solely to the Presidential Proclamation entitled 'Invocation of the Alien Enemies Act Regarding the Invasion of The United States by Tren De Aragua.'" It will not apply to migrants such as Kilmar Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran native removed from the country around the same time, but for reasons outside of Trump's invocation of the Alien Enemies Act. 'Defendants plainly deprived these individuals of their right to seek habeas relief before their summary removal from the United States — a right that need not itself be vindicated through a habeas petition,' U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg wrote in the order. 'Perhaps the President lawfully invoked the Alien Enemies Act. Perhaps, moreover, Defendants are correct that Plaintiffs are gang members. But — and this is the critical point — there is simply no way to know for sure, as the CECOT Plaintiffs never had any opportunity to challenge the Government's say-so.' Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act in March to target members of Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang deemed a foreign terrorist organization by the administration and accused of engaging in "mass illegal migration to the United States to further its objectives of harming United States citizens." By invoking the war-time law, Trump was able to swiftly detain and remove immigrants he claimed were members of the gang. One day after invoking the Act, the Trump administration announced it had deported hundreds of alleged Venezuelan gang members across at least two planes to El Salvador, even as Boasberg in a ruling at the time blocked the deportations and ordered any flights carrying migrants subject to the presidential proclamation return to the United States. The Trump administration challenged the block on its Alien Enemies Act deportations, but the ruling was upheld by the D.C. Circuit of Appeals. The U.S. Supreme Court later faulted the administration for giving the Venezuelan detainees only 24 hours to challenge their deportations before returning the case to an appeals court for further proceedings. Boasberg in his ruling noted that the Supreme Court unanimously agreed "that those subject to removal under the Act must be allowed to challenge their removability in federal court before being deported." "Defendants instead spirited away planeloads of people before any such challenge could be made. And now, significant evidence has come to light indicating that many of those currently entombed in CECOT have no connection to the gang and thus languish in a foreign prison on flimsy, even frivolous, accusations," Boasberg wrote. Boasberg has provided the government a week to propose a plan as to "how they intend to facilitate the ability of the CECOT class to seek habeas relief," making clear the Venezuelan migrants must be granted the opportunity to contest their removal under the Alien Enemies Act, but conceding that "such a remedy may implicate sensitive diplomatic or national-security concerns." The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Lawyers for the non-profit groups representing the migrants praised Boasberg's ruling as affirming that the right to due process extends to individuals in the country illegally. 'The court properly recognized that the government cannot send people to a notorious foreign gulag without due process and then wash its hands of the situation,' said ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt, who serves as lead counsel on the case.
The Independent
17 hours ago
- The Independent
Sinn Fein ‘will always stand on the side of journalism'
Sinn Fein 'will always stand on the side of journalism', one of its MPs has said. North Belfast MP John Finucane was speaking after his party's former president Gerry Adams won a defamation case against BBC Northern Ireland. Mr Adams took the BBC to court over a 2016 episode of its Spotlight programme, and an accompanying online story, which he said defamed him by alleging he sanctioned the killing of former party official Denis Donaldson, for which he denies any involvement. On Friday, a jury at the High Court in Dublin found in his favour and awarded him 100,000 euros (£84,000) after determining that was the meaning of words included in the programme and article. The BBC will also have to pay Mr Adams's legal costs. However, the broadcaster has been granted a stay on paying out the full costs and damages to allow it time to consider whether to lodge an appeal. Speaking outside court on Friday, Adam Smyth, director of BBC NI, said implications of the libel victory against the broadcaster are 'profound', and could 'hinder freedom of expression'. On Wednesday, Sinn Fein vice-president Michelle O'Neill told reporters in Belfast that Mr Adams was 'right to defend his good name'. But, she said, in a 'separate issue', journalists are 'entitled to do your job, to report fairly and honestly and actually scrutinise things, and to do so without any kind of intimidation or any fear'. She also pointed out that Mr Finucane, in his role as a solicitor, had defended Belfast journalists Trevor Birney and Barry McCaffrey. He added: 'We've been witness to journalists being murdered for doing their job in Gaza, we have seen the arrest of Trevor Birney and Barry McCaffrey for doing their job (to) a very high standard. 'So I think we'll always stand on the side of journalism to be able to do their job robustly, without anybody receiving fear or intimidation as a result of that.' Earlier this week, Amnesty International published a report revealing there has been more than 70 attacks and death threats against journalists in Northern Ireland over the last six years. It also concluded that the region is the most dangerous place in the UK to be a reporter. Also speaking to media in Belfast on Wednesday, Stormont Justice Minister and Alliance Party leader Naomi Long said she condemns intimidation, threats, violence and abuse directed at anyone. 'The idea that this kind of abuse, this kind of vitriol, is normalised in our society, I think, is unacceptable, and we do need a reset,' she said. 'It is not acceptable to threaten a journalist because you don't like what they published. It is not acceptable to threaten their family because you want to intimidate them from doing their job. 'A free press is part of the accountability mechanisms in a democratic society, and a fair and free press is absolutely essential to holding those in power, whether political power or otherwise, to account, and when you try to curtail that, when you try to restrict that in terms of threats and intimidation and violence, then you are essentially attacking democracy, not just individual journalists.' She said she believes fundamentally in the freedom of the press, adding that if there is more that the PSNI can do in that regard, she would want them to do it. 'I cannot direct the PSNI, as you're aware, as Justice Minister, but as leader of the Alliance Party, I am absolutely clear that there is no space in our society and no place for intimidation or threat against journalists,' she said. 'Some of the stories that people have expressed, some of the stories that people have told about repeated threats being brought to them by the PSNI, about their families being intimidated, their children, their partners, that is completely unacceptable, and it needs to be taken seriously, thoroughly investigated and hopefully followed up with robust prosecution.'
