A Dublin couple’s adult son allegedly tried to “light” their house on fire while breaking a barring order but has been held in custody.
The man, in his 30s, appeared before Judge Dermot Simms at a weekend sitting of Dublin District Court and was remanded to prison until somebody agrees to stand bail.
He was charged with breaching the order, being intoxicated to such an extent he was a danger to himself and others, and engaging in threatening, insulting or abusive language or behaviour at his parents’ south Dublin suburban home on Friday.
Garda Neil Young said the accused, who cannot be identified due to the Domestic Violence Act’s reporting restrictions, was allegedly “highly intoxicated” and “tried to light the house on fire”.
Markets in Vienna or Christmas at The Shelbourne? 10 holiday escapes over the festive season
Ciara Mageean: ‘I just felt numb. It wasn’t even sadness, it was just emptiness’
Stealth sackings: why do employers fire staff for minor misdemeanours?
Carl and Gerty Cori: a Nobel Prizewinning husband and wife team
The man’s parents were not on the property at the time. However, it was alleged he also told another family member there that he would “light” the house if he returned. The garda feared witness intimidation and further breaches of the barring order.
The court heard the accused, yet to indicate a plea resides at a different location. However, his barrister Kevin McCrave said his client would obey bail conditions, including staying away from the site of the alleged incident.
Still, the accused was concerned it could impact his ability to play sports with a local club.
Judge Dermot Simms granted bail but required approval of a €500 independent surety before the accused could be released. Describing the charges as “very serious”, he said the terms could ensure no further problems.
Once bail has been taken up, the man must stay away from his parents’ home and the wider area and sign on daily at a Garda station.
The bail restrictions were modified to allow him to participate in his sports activities which his barrister said showed the man was not without pro-social attitudes.
Judge Simms replied that these charges had nothing to do with “any rationale in the human psyche”.
The case resumes later this month. Legal aid was granted.