Three months for teens in violent Dublin mugging
Four teenage boys who took part in the violent mugging of a man, whose pregnant wife witnessed the incident and suffered a miscarriage on the following day, have been detained for three months.
The case had been adjourned until today, pending victim-impact statements and for enquiries to be carried out to ascertain whether the miscarriage suffered by the man’s wife was brought on by her having witnessed the violent ordeal.
Judge Cormac Dunne said that it had not been possible to determine whether or not the miscarriage was linked to the incident, which he described as being one of “barbaric, brutal battery” that had a devastating effect on the victims.
“The miscarriage may be directly attributed to the trauma and violence because it occurred within 24 hours of the trauma. Alternatively, it may be attributable to separate medical reasons,” the judge said.
The four boys, all aged 17, had pleaded guilty at the Dublin Children’s Court to the attempted robbery of the man at Pleasant Street, south Dublin, on February 6 last year. A fifth boy, also aged 17, is also to be brought before the court in relation to the same incident.
The man had been set upon by the group and kicked and beaten in front of his pregnant wife, who became extremely distressed.
The incident escalated after the group demanded the man to hand over one euro to them.
One of the teenagers had drunk a naggin bottle of vodka on the day of the incident.
Judge Dunne said: “This is a very unusual and very sad case where a husband and wife were walking along the streets and they were gratuitously attacked. The attack led the husband to seek to physically protect his wife, who was pregnant at the time,”
“The next day, we are advised that this decent lady lost her baby. We are advised that man was kicked and beaten and set upon.
"Recently, in this country, this type of behaviour has been attributed the misleading title of ‘anti-social behaviour’. That is a misleading misnomer and masking conduct which is barbaric, brutal battery.”
He described this conduct as intimidation of vulnerable people.
“What is more vulnerable than a husband and wife, a pregnant lady, walking our streets and being set on?”
Commenting on the effects the incident still had on the husband and wife, a year and four months later, he said: “They have lost confidence in traversing the streets at day or night. They feel vulnerable. They feel at risk.”
“The wife, whose privacy I wish to protect, is totally uneasy. She cannot relax until her husband comes home because she is terrified something will occur to him.”
He said none of the defendants had previous convictions but added that their conduct had “drastically changed the lives of decent people”.
In dealing with the case, the court had to balance the rights of the victims and additionally take into consideration in a careful way the rights of each of the defendants, he said.
However, there had been nothing forwarded in court to explain why they committed the offence, other than that one of them had drunk a naggin of vodka on the day of the incident, which Judge Dunne said was an aggravating factor.
“No other individual has mitigated any facts that could assist the court in considering mitigating factors.
“The court is of the view that a custodial sentence is the only appropriate remedy on this occasion,” he said as he detained the teenagers, which he added was in the interest of the public, the victims and the defendants.
“The interests of the accuseds are properly served by a detention sentence,” he said, finalising the case.
The teenagers remained silent during the sentence hearing and each was supported in court by family members, who appeared worried and upset.
Judge Dunne sympathised with the parents saying “no parent rears a child to go out on the streets and do what happened here.
“Rearing children has never been an easy task throughout civilisation, but in recent years has become an enormous task for parents with all the temptations pervading society.”
The court had heard that the one of the teenagers was currently in full-time employment.
His solicitor, Sarah Molloy, said the incident was appalling and nothing justified what her client had done. She also told Judge Dunne that the teen’s family is taking the matter very seriously.
She said the boy had drunk a naggin of vodka on the day of the incident.
Each of the three other co-defendants was taking part in training courses and had the support in court of their families.
In an account of the incident Garda Fergal McDonagh, of Pearse Street Station, had told the court that the woman, who is in her 30s, had not been physically attacked, but was present when her husband was subjected to repeated punches, then knocked to the ground and kicked on his head in front of her.
“The man saw the five youths coming towards him and his wife. The man and his wife crossed the road to avoid them. They approached and asked him for a euro,” said Gda McDonagh.
“The man said that he did not have money. They then surrounded him and started pushing him. He stayed in front of his pregnant wife to protect her.”
“He was pushed to the ground and got kicked on the head. The man then jumped back up and tried to push them away. The five punched him from all directions and then one of them threw a flying kick, hitting him on his chest.”
The man then got back onto his feet and chased the teenagers away. The group fled along Camden Street, where they were arrested shortly after.
Gda McDonagh said the man was left bleeding and bruised following the incident. His wife was left extremely distressed.
