Latest news with #DirectorOfPublicProsecutions
BreakingNews.ie
28-07-2025
- BreakingNews.ie
Man who beat former partner with hoover pole jailed for two years
A man who beat his former partner with a hoover pole has been given a two-year sentence. The Central Criminal Court heard that the woman was left with extensive bruising and cuts to her face, neck, arm, hands, shoulder and legs. She suffered carpet burns from being dragged across the sitting room floor Advertisement The 45-year-old accused man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, pleaded guilty to assault of the woman causing her harm and production of a hoover pole at his home, in February 2022. The accused man had been on trial twice on a further allegation of anal rape of the woman on the same occasion but the jury disagreed in both trials. He had pleaded not guilty to this offence. The Director of Public Prosecutions has entered a nolle prosequi in relation to the rape charge, meaning the charge has been dropped. The man has a previous conviction for assault which occurred after the woman made the rape allegation against him. He served a four-month sentence for this offence. Advertisement The woman did not wish to make a victim impact statement to the court. Passing sentence on Monday, Mr Justice Patrick McGrath said the woman had suffered a considerable number of injuries and the court must take the level of violence involved very seriously. He set a headline sentence of three years to reflect the offending. The judge noted in mitigation the early guilty plea and the man's expressions of remorse. He noted there was a subsequent assault for which the defendant has already served a sentence. Advertisement Mr Justice McGrath sentenced the accused man to two years' imprisonment which he backdated to reflect the time he has already spent in custody. An investigating garda told Garrett McCormack BL, prosecuting, that the woman reported to gardaí that she had been assaulted by the man. She told gardaí that there had been a verbal argument in respect of alleged cheating and he became aggressive and threw her to the ground. He assaulted her with the pipe of a hoover, striking her several times, and broke a glass panel in the kitchen door. The assault continued into the sitting room where she was punched and struck and hit again with the hoover pipe. The accused was arrested, denied the rape allegation and gave a 'mixed' version of events to gardaí. Advertisement The court heard a decision was later made to charge him with anal rape and the second assault, for which he has already served a sentence, occurred in an effort to get her to withdraw her statement. Joanne Williams BL, defending, said the couple had ben in an 'on-off' relationship at the time and living separately. She said both parties were abusing substances of one kind or another. She said the accused has a good work history prior to going into custody after giving up his bail voluntarily. She handed in character references on the accused man's behalf. She asked the court to take into account his early guilty plea in relation to the assault and had expressed remorse in relation to the assault to the injured party during the first trail. She said he has asked her to re-iterate this and apologise to the woman. She said he has recognised that alcohol is at the root of his offending and wants to engage with AA.
Irish Times
17-07-2025
- Irish Times
Wicklow woman suspected in contract killing conspiracy released by gardaí without charge
Gardaí investigating the murder of a man who may have been buried alive are focused on trying to bring to justice the gunman who fired the fatal shots and the person who paid him to carry out the killing. A woman who was being detained for questioning about the murder of Steven O'Meara (26) in Co Wicklow in 2009 was on Thursday released without charge. She is suspected of being a prime mover in putting in place the plan to kill Mr O'Meara. She was arrested on Tuesday on suspicion of the murder of Mr O'Meara in Ballydonnell Woods, Redcross, Co Wicklow, on August 6th, 2009. The suspect, who is in her 40s, was detained at a Co Wexford Garda station under Section 50 of the Criminal Justice Act, which is used to investigate gang-related crime. Though the legislation allows for a suspect to be questioned for up to seven days without charge, the woman was released on Thursday after about 48 hours. READ MORE She remains under investigation and gardaí are preparing a file for the Director of Public Prosecutions . Gardaí believe she has direct knowledge of a payment made to the gunman who shot Mr O'Meara in a drug-related dispute before he was buried in the Wicklow woods. A postmortem found he was shot in the trunk and leg. Asphyxia was a potential cause of death and it could not be ruled out he was still alive when he was buried. His remains were found on Christmas Eve, 2009, after men later convicted for their roles in the killing disclosed the burial location to gardaí. Mr O'Meara, a father of four from Rosehill in Wicklow town, had a history of substance abuse and had undertaken periods of rehabilitation. He mixed with men involved in the drug trade. Gardaí believe he had gone to the woods in Redcross to collect a €5,000 drug debt from a local man on behalf of a Dublin-based gang. Mr O'Meara believed the money was going to be paid to him in the woods and he was driven there by an associate of the man who owed the money to the gang. However, when they arrived, a group of people was waiting and Mr O'Meara was first assaulted before being shot and buried. Clement Byrne, then aged 49, was in 2013 jailed for the manslaughter of Mr O'Meara. Byrne, of Clonattin Village, Gorey, Co Wexford, said he punched Mr O'Meara in the woods before another man shot him dead. Michael Dickenson, then aged 27, formerly of Darragh Park, Wicklow town, was in 2012 jailed for life for the murder of Mr O'Meara. Dickenson admitted driving the victim to the woods and witnessing the murder but insisted he did not know Mr O'Meara was going to be shot. Aside from the two men convicted, several other people – including the suspected gunman – have also been arrested and released without charge as part of the near 16-year investigation. A number of people with knowledge of the killing supplied information to the Garda in the months that followed and more information has been received recently. Garda sources said the investigation team was very hopeful others involved in the conspiracy would face justice.
BreakingNews.ie
17-07-2025
- BreakingNews.ie
Man and woman (20s) arrested after €715k of drugs seized in Co Dublin
A man and a woman have been arrested after gardaí seized €715,000 of drugs in Clondlakin, Co Dublin on Wednesday. While on patrol in the Rathcoole/Citywest area, gardaí stopped a vehicle in the early hours of the morning. Advertisement The driver, a man in his 20s, was searched along with the vehicle under the provisions of the Misuse of Drugs Act, 1977. During the course of the search, gardaí seized cannabis herb (subject to analysis) with an estimated street value of €10,000. The man was arrested and detained under Section 4 of the Criminal Justice Act, 1984 at a Garda station in Dublin. Gardaí conducted further searches at three residential properties and during the course of these searches cannabis herb, cocaine and crack cocaine was seized along with various drug related paraphernalia. The estimated street value of drugs seized was €705,000. A woman, aged in her 20s was arrested during the course of one search and was detained at a Garda station in Dublin. The seized drugs, with a total estimated street value of €715,000, have been forwarded to Forensic Science Ireland for analysis. The male has been charged in relation to the seizure and is due to appear before Blanchardstown District Court on Thursday. The woman has since been released without charge and a file will now be prepared for the Director of Public Prosecutions. Gardaí say investigations are ongoing.
BreakingNews.ie
14-07-2025
- BreakingNews.ie
Mother (54) should never have been convicted of sexually assaulting her children, court rules
A 54-year-old woman should never have been convicted of sexually assaulting her three children as she was subjected to an 'extreme' imbalance of power when she made inculpatory statements to a psychologist and polygrapher, the Court of Appeal has ruled. "The only evidence against her were inculpatory statements which she made in truly extraordinary circumstances,' said Mr Justice Brian O'Moore on Monday, allowing the woman an appeal against her conviction. Advertisement He noted that the Director of Public Prosecutions was not opposing this appeal, and a retrial will not be sought. The appellant had pleaded not guilty but was convicted by a jury in July 2024 of four offences contrary to section 2 of the Criminal Law (Rape) (Amendment) Act 1990, as amended by section 37 of the Sex Offenders Act 2001. She was also convicted of one offence contrary to section 246 (1) and (2) of the Children Act, 2001. She was sentenced by Judge Catherine Staines to eight years, with the final two years suspended, but had remained on bail pending her appeal. Advertisement 'One of the most heinous crimes is sexual abuse by a mother of her own children,' said Mr Justice O'Moore, adding that the woman should never have been convicted of these offences. He said that to add to the unusual nature of this case, the statements were made not to gardaí but to a psychologist and a polygrapher retained by Tusla. 'The manner in which (they) conducted certain parts of the final two days of interviews did not meet the standards one would expect, to put it mildly,' said Mr Justice O'Moore. He said that the woman was assessed and interviewed over five days in August 2015, before she made inculpatory statements on the final day. Advertisement In July 2021, she was tried before the Circuit Court, where the judge ruled that admissions made ought to be excluded as they were not voluntary. The trial judge directed the jury to return a verdict of not guilty. The DPP appealed this, with the Court of Appeal ruling that the admissions ought not to be excluded. This decision was upheld by the Supreme Court, with a retrial then taking place. During the retrial, the psychologist accepted that statements made by the polygrapher could have been interpreted as inducements. The psychologist also accepted that there was a risk that the appellant may have made admissions to him on the basis that she believed this was what he wanted. The trial judge said she had serious concerns about the voluntariness of the admissions, but she ultimately ruled that she was bound by the decision of the Supreme Court and that the admissions made by the woman were admissible. Advertisement Mr Justice O'Moore said that a mother was questioned over a five-day period about her relations with her children, and she was put under huge pressure to give the answers which at least one of her interlocutors made clear that he wanted to hear. A deal was then proposed to her by which "the whole unpleasant process" would come to an end if she just gave the desired answers. 'We believe the trial judge was wrong to find that the issues agitated before her had been decided by the Court of Appeal or by the Supreme Court,' said Mr Justice O'Moore. Ireland Uber delivery cyclist (36) settles €60k damages cl... Read More He said that neither the Court of Appeal nor the Supreme Court had available to it the revealing evidence of the psychologist given in the second trial, where he effectively accepted that certain interventions by the polygrapher constituted inducements and that the woman was on occasion telling him what she thought he wanted to hear. Advertisement 'It is clear that the interviews were unfair in a very fundamental way,' said Mr Justice O'Moore, adding that 'the imbalance of power was extreme' between the appellant and those interviewing her. He went on to say that the trial judge should have proceeded to follow through on her own analysis and exclude the inculpatory statements. 'As these admissions constituted the only evidence against her, it follows that she should have been acquitted of all charges against her,' said Mr Justice O'Moore, ruling that the court would allow the appeal.
BBC News
02-07-2025
- BBC News
Conor McGregor evidence withdrawal to be referred to prosecutors
Ireland's Court of Appeal is to refer a matter in a case involving the former mixed martial arts (MMA) fighter Conor McGregor to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).The court is hearing an appeal by McGregor arising from a finding in the High Court last year when a woman who accused McGregor of raping her won her civil claim against him for damages.A jury found McGregor sexually assaulted Nikita Hand in a Dublin hotel in December was ordered to pay her more than €248,000 (£206,000) in damages and, subsequently, her legal costs. The Court of Appeal hearing ended on Wednesday afternoon and a full decision will be given at a later day. McGregor has not appeared at the appeal hearing since it began on Tuesday. What happened in the Conor McGregor appeal? On the second day of the appeal hearing, a barrister for Nikita Hand asked the court to refer papers, relating to an issue from the opening day of the appeal, to Irish public prosecutors. It followed the dramatic withdrawal of proposed new evidence by McGregor at the beginning of the appeal on proposed new evidence was from a couple, Samantha O'Reilly and her partner Steven Cummins, who were former neighbours of Nikita had previously claimed, in an affidavit, to have witnessed a row between Nikita Hand and a former partner in the home they shared at the time.A preliminary hearing had been told that McGregor believed the new evidence suggested that bruising on Nikita Hand's body could have been caused by her former Hand had described their claims as "lies" and she came to court yesterday prepared to take the witness stand to be cross-examined about the the hearing began with the unexpected announcement that McGregor had decided to withdraw the proposed new barrister said part of the reason was because other supporting evidence they wanted to introduce would not be also said the legal team believed there was no corroboration of Ms O'Reilly's evidence, and it was not a sustainable the decision was being outlined by McGregor's legal team, judges on the three-member appeal panel sought further clarification about why the decision had been judge said she did not fully understand the reason for the withdrawal of the evidence, while a second judge said "bemused" was a kind way of describing what he was hearing about the Hand's lawyer said on Tuesday that she was due an apology for being "put through the wringer" about the evidence which was being Wednesday, he said the proposed new evidence had been widely circulated in the media and the allegation were made to undermine Ms Hand's asked the court to send papers relating to the matter to the Director of Public Prosecutions and the court agreed. McGregor co-accused appealing costs Earlier on Wednesday, the court heard that James Lawrence, who alongside McGregor was accused of rape by Ms Hand, was appealing the decision not to award him costs after the jury in the civil case last year found he did not assault her.A barrister for Mr Lawrence told the appeal court that the general principle is that "costs follow events".He said the event in this case was the finding that Mr Lawrence did not assault Nikita the High Court trial in 2024, the judge said the two men were acting in "lockstep" in their defence of the action and it would be inappropriate to award costs to Mr Lawrence even though the jury found he did not rape Ms the appeal this morning, Mr Lawrence's barrister said the trial judge had acted in an "incorrect manner" and that the jury had rejected that there had been collusion.A barrister for Ms Hand responded by pointing out that the 2024 trial had been told McGregor paid Mr Lawrence's legal fees, and they had been using the same legal teams until recentlyHe said he did not want to speculate on the reason for Mr Lawrence having a different legal team now but added it was "presumably to put an air of distance between them".He also said any award of costs to Mr Lawrence would exceed the level of damages awarded to Ms Hand, and would "set at nought" the award of damages to Ms HandOne of the three judges said the barrister was making a "difficult" argument because he was asking them to look at "the consequences" of the High Court case while their responsibility is to look at the case.
