Girl (12) dies after getting into swimming difficulties in Co Tipperary
The incident occurred at a local swimming spot in the village of Newcastle, located close to Ballymacarbry near the Co Waterford border, shortly after 4pm.
The swimming area is along the Suir Blueway, and the girl had been swimming with a number of others when the incident occurred.
Emergency services and gardaí attended the scene and the girl was transferred to Cork University Hospital (CUH) by the Irish Coast Guard Air and Sea Rescue 117 helicopter, after being recovered from the water at around 4.45pm.
READ MORE
It is understood that the young girl's family is from Newcastle.
In a statement, An Garda Síochána said they and the emergency services attended an incident where 'a female child got into difficulty in the water at River Suir, Newcastle, Co Tipperary at approximately 4.20pm today'.
The statement continued: 'She was airlifted by Rescue 117 to Cork University Hospital in a serious condition. She has since passed away.'
A file will be prepared for the Coroner's Court. Garda investigations are ongoing.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
44 minutes 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.
Irish Times
10 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
10 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
