A Donegal man who delivered an engagement ring on the residence of his ex-partner whereas a security order was in place has been given a suspended jail sentence.
The person, who’s aged in his 30s, can’t be named for authorized causes to guard the identification of the girl, appeared earlier than Choose Éiteáin Cunningham at Letterkenny District Court docket.
The person confronted eight separate expenses of breaching a security order, an offence opposite to Part 33 of the Home Violence Act 2018. A responsible plea was tendered within the case of every.
The fees relate to offences on numerous dates between December 2022, when the accused emailed the girl, to June 2023. A security order was granted by the Court docket in December 2022.
The lady instructed Gardai that she acquired a variety of messages by digital means, together with by e-mail and Revolut.
On a date in June, the person tried to name her from his telephone, whereas the next day he tried to have interaction in dialog. The lady reported how this made her really feel ‘uneasy and intimidated’.
On one other event, the girl returned residence to discover a white field containing an engagement ring and a be aware left on the again door of her home.
Requested about this by Sergeant Jim Collins in Court docket, the person mentioned: “I owed her a couple of pound and I believed she may promote it to make the few pound.”
Mr Donough Cleary, solicitor for the accused, described the return of the engagement ring and the be aware as a ‘mark of pathos’.
The courtroom heard that the person has 15 earlier convictions, primarily for minor street site visitors offences and public order offences.
Mr Cleary, mentioned the pair have been in a prolonged relationship and mentioned his consumer by no means made a risk. Choose Cunningham instructed the solicitor it was clear that the girl felt threatened by the contact.
Mr Cleary mentioned the person is ‘actively in search of help’. “The psychological well being service is strained to breaking, however he takes no matter assist there may be when he will get it.”
At a sitting of the courtroom the earlier week, the person was refused bail.
Then, a Garda instructed the courtroom that he believed that the accused man felt that every one expenses ‘are an entire joke’ and that his anger in the direction of the girl is ‘growing week on week’.
The lady herself instructed the Court docket that she was terrified and feels ‘mentally tortured’.
She mentioned: “I can’t get any peace. I’m locking myself in the home.”
The accused, his solicitor instructed the courtroom, now has ‘perception’ into his behaviour. “He’s very cognisant of the results of what occurred,” he mentioned.
Choose Cunningham mentioned the courtroom was of a view that these have been ‘severe’ issues.
“I’m not satisfied that he totally appreciates the importance, however I need to give him each alternative,” Choose Cunningham mentioned, including that she didn’t need the matter ‘dragging out’.
On one of many expenses, Choose Cunningham convicted the person and sentenced him to 2 months in jail, suspending the sentence for a interval of 12 months.
Choose Cunningham directed that the accused enter into a bit 99 bond and given that he have interaction with the probation companies. The person was granted bail on the opposite expenses.
He was ordered to remain out of the village the sufferer resides in, he’s to haven’t any contact in any way with the sufferer, both instantly or not directly and together with through social media. The person is to be contactable by Gardai through phone always and was instructed to abide by the Home Violence order imposed by the Court docket.
“It’s fairly clear that there’s an order and there needs to be strict adherence to that order,” Choose Cunningham mentioned.
Choose Cunningham directed the preparation of a probation and welfare report and made a brief adjournment for the aim of ‘monitoring’. The matter was listed once more for the July 3 sitting of Letterkenny District Court docket.
Man delivered engagement ring to ex whereas she had security order in opposition to him was final modified: June twenty third, 2023 by