Kildare teens threw gas cylinders and traffic cones onto road, court hears

A JUDGE put the fear into a pair of teens charged with reckless endangerment and criminal damage that if things don’t go their way over the next fortnight in parole services administration, they could face up to 14 years in jail.

“That means you wouldn’t get out until you were nearly 30! Thirty! You wouldn’t survive jail,” intoned Judge Desmond Zaidan to the pair before him.

Earlier Naas District Court heard how the two 15-year-olds had been out in the early hours of 26 July in a town within the court district when they embarked on a reckless act.

“They got a number of traffic cones and gas cylinders and threw them out into the road,” said Sergeant Mary Meade.

“A man in a Volkswagen Caddy van on his way to early work was driving in when the obstacles caused him to swerve and crash causing extensive damage to his vehicle,” she said. The damage was estimated at €6,000.

“(One of the culprits) was found hiding behind (a named service station), and (the other individual) was found in the village. It was around 4am,” said Sgt Meade.

Both were now facing charges of criminal damage and reckless endangerment contrary to Section 14 of the Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act.

“Was this a prank or thuggery?” asked Judge Zaidan.

“We don’t know," said the sergeant.

“This could’ve cost this man his life,” said the judge.

“If it was, this was an expensive prank. I mean, he could’ve mounted the kerb, killed himself, or somebody else very easily. I’m going to refuse (jurisdiction),” he ruled, alluding to the fact that a little while earlier, Sgt Meade told him the DPP had decided this was a summary offence to be dealt in the district court.

Defence solicitor Chloe Donegan made an application for a Section 75 hearing under the Children’s Act, which means the Probation Service has a large hand in deciding eventual jurisdiction.

Both boys were accompanied to court by their parents, to which the judge directed his next remarks.

“Do they go to school?” he asked.

“Yeah. They’re in Junior Cert year,” confirmed one of the mothers, before adding: “We are very sorry for everything our son has brought to this."

“What he has done has put pressure on our marriage,” she revealed.

“He’s looking to go on and do carpentry,” she said.

The judge asked about truancy, and she answered honestly.

“Yes, he does miss the few days, but the school knows nothing about this (offence),” she said.

The other mother now joined in the condemnation.

“We were absolutely disgusted with his behaviour, and we put him straight into therapy,” she said.

“Thankfully, since this happened, he has not come to garda attention."

She added: “We are very disappointed. This is not the way we brought him up."

“You seem to be reasonable people,” said the judge.

"Boys, have you any idea what pressures you’ve put on your parents?” he asked.

“Yeah,” came the reply.

“This stupid prank, or whatever you want to call it could’ve seriously hurt someone you know that was coming home from a nightclub,” he said.

He then got to the nitty-gritty and explained the significance of a Section 75 ruling.

“The DPP has asked me to deal with this here … (but) in this court the maximum sentence I can give is up to two years, but over there (the circuit court) you can be sentenced up to between 10 and 14 years. Ms Donegan has correctly applied for the Section 75 to try to convince me to keep it here,” he said.

“We’re disgusted at this and very sorry,” replied a parent.

“We are very hard-working parents, and they (the boys) don’t come from a bad background. They realise how serious this is."

“You could be facing up to 14 years in jail,” the judge reminded. “You’ll be nearly 30 years old when you get out. You won’t survive prison, so it’s about time you start to listen to your parents. Ok. So I’ll see you guys in two weeks’ time on 5 February (for the Section 75 ruling)”.