Judgment: 2022-11-11 · Court archive

Court of Appeal upholds revocation of bail over contact with alleged domestic violence victim

Court of Appeal · [2022] IECA 293

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • B.M.
  • Mr Justice McCarthy
What

Court of Appeal upholds revocation of bail over contact with alleged domestic violence victim

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Central Criminal Court
  • Court of Appeal
When

Judgment:

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

The Court of Appeal rejected those arguments. Mr Justice McCarthy said the early-morning female voice, the short interval between the two Garda visits, changes observed inside the house and the presence of the complainant and child later that day provided ample evidence, taken together, to support the inference that she had been present earlier.

The Court of Appeal has upheld the revocation of bail for B.M., who is awaiting trial on seven charges arising from alleged domestic violence against his former partner.

B.M. had been granted bail subject to a series of conditions after being sent forward for trial to the Central Criminal Court in March 2022. A central condition prohibited any direct or indirect contact with the alleged victim or other witnesses.

On 22 July 2022, Gardaí arrived at B.M.’s home shortly after 7am to arrest him over unrelated matters. Detective Sergeant David Scahill told the court that he heard what he believed was a woman’s voice coming from a rear bedroom but did not recognise it.

B.M. was taken to a Garda station. When Detective Sergeant Scahill returned to the house at 12.44pm, the alleged victim emerged from a back bedroom. She told him she was there voluntarily and had no safety concerns. Her young child was also in the house.

The prosecution applied to revoke B.M.’s bail, arguing that the presence of the alleged victim breached the no-contact condition. The Central Criminal Court agreed and revoked bail on 29 July 2022.

On appeal, B.M. argued there was no direct evidence that the woman heard that morning was the complainant, that she had been there while he was present, or when she had entered the property.

The Court of Appeal rejected those arguments. Mr Justice McCarthy said the early-morning female voice, the short interval between the two Garda visits, changes observed inside the house and the presence of the complainant and child later that day provided ample evidence, taken together, to support the inference that she had been present earlier.

The court stressed that the charges remain allegations. However, because they include rape, coercive control, assault and false imprisonment, the no-contact condition was particularly significant. The court found revocation proportionate and dismissed the appeal.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review