A Waterford man who is accused of assault causing harm against someone who allegedly owed him money, was recently refused bail.
The man, who cannot be named for legal reasons in order to protect the identity of the alleged injured party, was arrested before his court appearance and brought before Judge Kevin Staunton at a sitting of Waterford District Court recently, where the allegations in the case were set out for the Judge to consider bail.
Detective Garda Seán Lane outlined to the court that after the man was arrested, he was charged with assault causing harm, contrary to Section 3 of the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act, 1997, and he made no reply when cautioned. The charge relates to an alleged offence in Waterford in October 2025.
Detective Garda Lane said that the complainant reported to Gardaí, alleging he had been assaulted by the accused and two others at a location in Waterford City. It was alleged that this was because of a debt, where it was claimed the complainant owed several thousand euro to the accused.
It was also alleged that the accused had made threats to kill the complainant.
The court heard that the alleged assault involved the use of weapons and the complainant had to spend several nights seeking treatment at University Hospital Waterford (UHW), and could not walk for days afterwards. The complainant received injuries to his head, spine, fingers and knuckles, which included multiple fractures.
Detective Garda Lane also outlined that the complainant provided a 10-page written statement to Gardaí, but had initially been reluctant to do so
Acting for the defendant, Ken Cunningham highlighted that the complainant was not present in court and was initially reluctant to give a statement, but had a “change of heart” as the debt to the accused was allegedly still outstanding.
Mr. Cunningham added that his client has no previous convictions. He said that the complainant appears to have “flip-flopped” in their accusations against the accused, as they initially did not want to give a statement but changed their mind.
Detective Garda Lane replied that he would not agree with the term “flip-flopped” but said that the complainant was hesitant for certain reasons. He added that recently, more demands for the debt to be repaid were allegedly made, which is what led the complainant to come forward now.
Mr. Cunningham said that it could take months for a Book of Evidence to be prepared, and there was the possibility the case could be sent forward to the Circuit Criminal Court.
The solicitor added that there is a “constitutional assumption” that his client is entitled to bail, as he is an “accused person facing an accusation only” and all that is against him is “a statement of complaint from someone who wasn’t confident [to come forward] initially, but had a change of heart.” He again highlighted that his client has no previous convictions.
Judge Staunton reiterated that there is a “constitutional assumption” that the accused has a right to bail. The Judge said that the court has to be ‘careful’ in refusing someone bail, and that he would take into account the fact that the matter will “almost certainly” be brought before the Circuit Court, which would mean that the accused could be remanded in custody for a long period due to a delay with cases going to trial.
However, Judge Staunton said that the case involved “allegations of a most horrific assault” and that Garda concerns about the accused being granted bail are “well-founded”.
The Judge decided to refuse bail and remand the accused in custody to appear before Waterford District Court again via video link at the end of January.
Funded by the Court Reporting Scheme
Robyn Power
