
Man ‘struck with bottle and choked until he passed out in nightclub attack', court hears
Two men have been accused of a nightclub attack on another man who was struck in the face with a bottle and choked until he passed out.
Carlos Macedo (21) choked the man while Leonard Macedo (23) hit him with the bottle in a Dublin city centre club, it is alleged.
They were both granted conditional bail and their cases were adjourned at Dublin District Court.
The accused, with an address at O'Connell Street, Dublin, are charged with assault causing harm.
The court heard the incident was alleged to have happened at Dicey's Garden Club on Harcourt Street on June 29.
Objecting to bail for Carlos Macedo, a garda sergeant said he believed the accused was a flight risk as he had only been in Ireland for three days before the alleged assault.
Outlining the prosecution's case, he said Carlos Macedo was seen on CCTV striking the alleged victim, throwing a glass bottle and choking him, causing him to pass out. The man required hospitalisation, the court heard.
The DPP consented to the case being dealt with in the district court but Judge Peter White said there appeared to be a serious injury and refused jurisdiction.
They must stay away from Dicey's club and the alleged victim
Applying for bail, defence solicitor Donal Quigley said Carlos Macedo would say what happened in the club was a situation that 'came upon him and his father', who was also in hospital after the incident.
Gardaí objected to Leonard Macedo's bail on the same grounds. He was alleged to have struck the same man a number of times with a glass bottle, causing a cut to his face. There was 'no choking' alleged in his case and the judge postponed a decision on jurisdiction.
Judge White granted bail to both accused on condition they do not apply for any new travel documents after surrendering their passports.
They must stay at a city centre hostel, sign on daily at a garda station and stay away from Dicey's club and the alleged victim.
The judge granted free legal aid after hearing Carlos Macedo was not working, but hoped to get a delivery driver job. Leonard Macedo was working as a waiter.
Leonard and Carlos Macedo. Photo: irishphotodesk.ie
News in 90 Seconds - Monday July 14th

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Irish Examiner
11 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
Cork man who threatened to kill Tidy Towns volunteer ordered to attend anger management
A Cork man who threatened to kill a Tidy Towns volunteer has been ordered to attend anger management classes by a district court judge. Vincent Harrington, aged 52, of Desert View, Clonakilty, appeared for penalty before Judge Joanne Carroll at Clonakilty District Court. At a previous hearing, Harrington was convicted of threatening to kill a Tidy Towns volunteer who parked their van in a lay-by near the entrance to Harrington's driveway. The conviction related to an incident that occurred at Convent Hill, Clonakilty on the afternoon of May 27, 2024. Mr Harrington had threatened the Tidy Towns volunteer he would hold his head under water and 'keep it there until the last breath'. Mr Harrington had claimed the injured party's van was parked in a dangerous position in the lay-by which adjoined a busy main road. He said there was not enough room to safely pass it and it was parked in a position that restricted access to his property. When Garda Brian Noonan attended the scene, he was able to pass the parked van in the lay-by in the garda SUV and also reverse back past it as well. He told the court in his opinion the van was not parked in a dangerous position, did not block access to Mr Harrington's driveway and did not pose a danger for vehicles turning onto the adjoining main road. Judge Carroll said Harrington has been 'incensed by what he perceived was a wrong', but that was not the case. The judge said Harrington had wanted to 'threaten and bully people' into not parking in the lay-by, and wanted to 'take the law into his own hands.' The judge told Harrington: 'You are very volatile and explosive over this issue.' She ordered Harrington to attend at least 'three or four' anger management sessions, to donate €200 to the poor box and to carry out 20 hours of voluntary work, which she advised him not to do with the Tidy Towns. The judge said if Harrington obeyed the courts instructions, then the Probation Act would be applied and the case was adjourned to November 4, 2025. This article is funded by the Courts Reporting Scheme


Sunday World
16 hours ago
- Sunday World
Man jailed after claiming five-year-old girl made call that breached safety order
The woman told Tallaght District Court she was getting the children ready for school when her phone rang on July 2, 2024 A repeat offender who breached a safety order by calling his former partner and tried to blame a five-year-old girl for dialling the number has been jailed for three months. The man, who is in his 30s, had pleaded not guilty under Section 33(1) of the Domestic Violence Act 2018 after the court heard the woman was put in fear by the phone call, which came while she was at home with their children. The woman told Tallaght District Court she was getting the children ready for school when her phone rang on July 2, 2024. 'I was afraid. I just left the house with the kids,' she said. 'Usually when he rings, something bad happens. I felt it was unsafe to stay.' She said she didn't answer the call, but that it was enough to put her in fear. Under cross-examination from defence solicitor John O'Leary, she accepted she didn't know what the caller had intended to say, as she hadn't picked up. Garda Shane McCabe told the court that the complainant attended the Garda station on the evening of July 2 to report a possible breach of a safety order. He said she appeared agitated when giving her statement. Garda McCabe also told the court that the accused had six previous convictions, including assault, driving without insurance, and three prior breaches of safety and protection orders. The accused told the court he had been in a car when the call was made. He said he had given the phone to a child in the car and claimed she must have dialled the number. He told the court he had previously deleted the complainant's number but was using a new phone and had inserted a SIM card that still contained the number. He said he hadn't realised it was saved and only discovered the call had been made after checking the dialled numbers on the phone when the child returned it to him. Prosecuting solicitor Tom Conlon, for the DPP, suggested the explanation was too convenient. 'So it just so happened that a five-year-old took your phone and made a call - coincidentally - to the very person you're barred from contacting under a court order?' he asked. Mr Conlon also asked whether the accused had given that explanation to Gardaí at the time. 'I think I did, yeah,' the man replied. Mr O'Leary, in mitigation, said his client had been in an on-and-off relationship with the complainant for many years and 'loves her to bits". Counsel said the man was getting on well in custody, working in the prison kitchen, and wanted to put the matter behind him. Judge Shalom Binchy said there was nothing in the defence's mitigation to suggest the accused was addressing his issues with violence towards women. 'It's clear from his previous convictions that there's a difficulty in relation to violence and his attitude towards women,' she said. 'And not only that - he's now blaming a five-year-old girl for this breach.' She noted that the case had been contested and that the accused had three prior breaches of protection orders. She sentenced him to six months in prison, with the final three months suspended for 18 months. The man must enter a bond of €300 and attend the MOVE (Men Overcoming Violence) programme within three months of his release. Funded by the Courts Reporting Scheme Tallaght district court. Today's News in 90 Seconds - July 16th


RTÉ News
18 hours ago
- RTÉ News
Coroner rejects calls to refer death of farmer to gardaí
A coroner has rejected calls to refer the circumstances of the death of a 75-year-old Offaly farmer on the day after he got married to gardaí for a detailed forensic investigation. The application was made at the conclusion of a three-day inquest into the death of Joe Grogan, who died at his home in Screggan, Tullamore, Co Offaly, on 15 April 2023. He died just 24 hours after he got married to his part-time carer, Lisa Flaherty, in a registry office, Mr Grogan's relatives were unaware of the wedding and also unaware the couple were even in a relationship. Mr Grogan was well known in Irish farming circles for hosting the National Ploughing Championships between 2016 and 2018 and the farm will also stage this year's event in September. The inquest at Offaly Coroner's Court in Tullamore, heard that Ms Flaherty - a special needs assistant and mother of three who was 26 years junior to her husband - stands to inherit the 220-acre farm which is valued at €5.5 million as his widow. It had previously heard that the cause of Mr Grogan's death could not be determined because his body was embalmed before a post-mortem examination could be carried out which restricted the tests that could be conducted by a pathologist. Mr Grogan had been diagnosed with Stage IV Non-Hodgkin lymphoma (a form of blood cancer) in January 2023 and had responded well to treatment, although Ms Flaherty gave evidence that he believed he was dying. Counsel for three cousins of the deceased - Alo, Margaret and Seán Grogan - Damien Tansey SC, called on the coroner, Raymond Mahon, not to return a verdict and to refer the matter to the DPP for a forensic examination of Mr Grogan's death by gardaí. Mr Tansey said it would be most unfair to the farmer's memory and to his family if the request was declined. Separately, Peter Jones, a solicitor for Teresa Mooney, an aunt of Mr Grogan, also asked the coroner to refer the death to gardaí and to return an open verdict. Mr Jones claimed the inquest had left "an awful lot of unanswered questions" and the circumstances of Mr Grogan's death could only be challenged by trained personnel used to investigating "suspicious deaths". However, Mr Mahon returned a narrative verdict based on extensive evidence and claimed Mr Grogan's death was probably due to an infection on the balance of probabilities. He noted that Mr Grogan had a Stage IV high grade cancer who was receiving chemotherapy treatment with a compromised immune system who had also suffered "significant weight loss". Mr Grogan's weight went from 79kg in June 2022 to 67.6kg at the time he was diagnosed with cancer and to 51kg at the time of his death. The coroner said evidence from witnesses of Mr Grogan's "slow, elongated decline" lent support to his view that Mr Grogan's death was caused by an infection. He rejected the suggestion of Mr Tansey that a verdict of unlawful killing could be considered as the evidence was not "anywhere near the level of proof" required to support such a finding. Referring to a claim by Mr Jones that Mr Grogan had been "left to die," Mr Mahon said there was valid criticism about the way Mr Grogan's care was managed following his last session of chemotherapy. However, Mr Mahon, who retired as coroner following the case, noted that Mr Grogan had repeatedly told people he did not want to go to hospital and a relative had stated that it was obvious he was dying. In a submission, Mr Tansey said there was disquiet in the area where Mr Grogan lived over the circumstances of his death, which had been significantly added to by the evidence heard at the inquest. He claimed that the coroner also appeared "sufficiently troubled" to repossess the body after it had been embalmed to allow an examination to be carried out to try and establish the cause of death. Mr Tansey said the pathologist Charles D'Adhemar, was working in impossible circumstances due to the "irreparable damage" caused by the embalming process. However, he noted that Dr D'Adhemar had been able to detect the presence of three drugs in the body which, if used in a combination of large quantities, could cause respiratory depression. Mr Tansey accused Ms Flaherty of telling "porkies" by putting out a false narrative that Mr Grogan was at the end stage of life and requiring palliative care. He observed that Ms Flaherty had not tried to explain that she was in an "on-off relationship" with Mr Grogan when she gave evidence that their relationship had been over 16 years, but later having to admit that she had another partner up to 2020. Mr Tansey said another troubling issue was the secrecy surrounding the couple's marriage about which even Ms Flaherty's sister and best friend were unaware. He also observed she had not called any doctor to see Mr Grogan for the ten days he had been at home before his death after being discharged from hospital after chemotherapy. The barrister claimed Ms Flaherty had also called an undertaker with "indecent haste" and had tried to "ensnare" a doctor in her scheme for getting Mr Grogan's body released. There was a gasped reaction among the large crowd attending the inquest when Mr Tansey reminded the coroner that a verdict of unlawful killing was open to him. He pointed out that Mr Grogan was clearly ill in the days before his death and there was going to be "a dreadful end" if there was no appropriate medical intervention. However, he said the only time Mr Grogan was taken from his house during that period was to go to a registry office "to hurriedly and secretly arrange a marriage". In his submission, Mr Jones said the most solid evidence at the inquest came from doctors who had never given a direction that Mr Grogan required palliative care as suggested by Ms Flaherty. He noted an oncologist had stated his death was not inevitable and Mr Jones said it would be a travesty to suggest otherwise. The solicitor remarked that a "reign of secrecy" had prevailed over Mr Grogan's final days, while adding that his death was not due to cancer, heart failure or any infection. However, he claimed the inquest, despite the coroner's best efforts, had not come any nearer to establishing the cause of death. Mr Jones also noted the "cruelty" of members of the Grogan family being excluded and only being told of his death by a friend. He argued the only people who could "get to the bottom of this" would be An Garda Síochána and a further investigation would "satisfy public disquiet". The solicitor said Mr Grogan wanted to live and had "everything to live for". However, counsel for Ms Flaherty, Stephen Byrne BL, claimed the inquest had been used to attack her good name and reputation. Mr Byrne said one submission had just stopped short of accusing her of causing Mr Grogan's death. He claimed the fact that gardaí had not taken any further steps to date "must carry some weight". Mr Byrne reminded the coroner that one of Mr Grogan's own relatives, Enta Conroy, had given evidence that he was fading and approaching the end of his life. He pointed out that no member of the Grogan family had contacted any doctor if they were so concerned about his health. The barrister said he struggled to find the relevance of the marriage to the inquest, while the coroner had directed that its validity was not open for discussion. He also sharply criticised the approach adopted by the Grogan family to the inquest and how they thought it fit and appropriate that Ms Flaherty should have been asked if her marriage had ever been consummated. The previous two days of evidence of the inquest had also been dominated by heated exchanges between the legal representatives after the validity of the marriage was questioned, despite a marriage certificate being produced at the hearing. There were further heated exchanges after Mr Tansey claimed previous evidence of Ms Flaherty which stated her relationship with the deceased started when she was 16 "puts it in the realm of being a paedophile". Offering his commiserations to all parties at the conclusion of the inquest, the coroner said it had been "a very difficult case for everyone". Speaking afterwards, Seán Grogan said his family had just wanted to find that "our cousin was treated properly in his dying days" after concerns were first raised when his funeral arrangements had been "chopped and changed". Mr Tansey said the Grogans had been surprised and concerned to find out that no medical personnel had been contacted by Ms Flaherty in the ten days before his death when it was clear he was suffering some infection from his last session of chemotherapy. The barrister said the focus "from here on in will be the merit and circumstances of that marriage".