'One big mess' ends quietly in Athy family court

AN estranged wife who ran five counties away with two kids after a second protection order breach by her husband last year prompted one person present in the courtroom to lean in and write: 'very sad, one big mess' across this reporter's notes.

The couple were married for more than ten years and had lived in south Kildare until “she ran away” from the home.

“Every time I went to the garda station he does something to me,” she said.

“He threatened me with his friends and broke the brake pad on my car,” she alleged.

“He came back from work, gardaí were in our house, our daughter was screaming and told him mummy had gone to the guards. He called me and said I’d regret it.

“I told them I was afraid to go home. They asked me had I anywhere, and I said I had friends in (named county).”

The woman then made a subsequent statement in this county.

In cross-examination, Seamus Taaffe argued that his client did not threaten the witness, but she countered: “He is a very violent man”.

“You said he’d do something to you?” asked Mr Taaffe.

“He wanted to keep our (couple's child) in (named town),” she alleged.

“She’s now in a new school and sees her father regularly.

“I didn’t want to sign a statement here because I was afraid, but I wasn’t afraid in (named county) because he was far away.

“I had to change my work here because he knew where it was,” she said.

Her husband next took the stand and immediately denied he threatened to use his friends for revenge and that the kids are not left alone in the house, as she had alleged.

“She now has a husband in (new county), so her motivation to move wasn’t fear,” he said.

“Have you put her in fear?” asked Mr Taaffe of his client, and he replied emphatically: “No”.

“Do you see the kids now?” asked Judge John Brennan, presiding.

“It is suggested you moved to (new county) for a boyfriend?” asked Mr Taaffe.

“I left in the middle of the night, packed one bag,” she said.

“It’s a very different situation for both parties,” noted the judge.

“The kids are 200km from their home town,” he added.

“(The woman) comes across as a credible witness and her phrasing doesn’t sound made up,” said the judge.

“He says he didn’t raise his voice or be abusive, but he’s not seeing the kids on a regular basis.

"He reacted in an inappropriate way in his breach of the protection urder in May and June,” he continued.

He noted the children have been “uprooted” but that the man had no previous convictions.

“Hopefully, (the defendant) will have learnt his lesson. I will apply S1(i) [of the Probation Act. That’s it, then,” he ruled.

Judge Brennan now turned to the secondary access of amended access for the father, and this, though drawn out, was not fractious.

The mother agreed to Easter holiday demands, though not yet those of the summer, and she also opposed going from two weekends a month to three.

“It isn’t that she wants to be awkward; it’s just not feasible,” said Mr Boyle.

Judge Brennan tended to agree, noting it would be a long drive on three Fridays a month for the younger of the two children.

“Two weekends is just four days a month, you have them 26, 27 days a month,” said Mr Taaffe, who also told the court his client had amended his shift work to allow for greater access.

Judge Brennan tasked Mr Taaffe and Mr Boyle to thrash out a new plan that both sides could agree on, and offered an interim order, to be revisited on 10 June.