Three Tipperary men referred to Restorative Justice Programme over neighbourhood feud

Three Thurles men have been referred to the Restorative Justice Programme for a fight that ended with one man pulling a rifle on his neighbour.

Billy Collins, 71, of Seskin, Thurles was charged with assault and producing an article and pointing it in a way to likely cause intimidation.

Russell Loughnane, 44 of The Heath, Cormackstown, Thurles and Simon McCarthy, 21 of Noard, Two-Mile-Borris, Thurles were both charged with assault during the same incident.

In her concluding remarks, Judge Elizabeth MacGrath advised all parties to engage “meaningfully” with the programme.

“What I would say is life is short. So, go into this with an open mind,” said Judge MacGrath.

CONFRONTATION

Mr Loughnane told the court that on January 19, 2022, his girlfriend informed him that dog waste had been flung at the house and was spread all over the property.

When he asked if she knew who had done it, she told him “who else”.

Mr Loughnane said he had interpreted this to mean Mr Collins had been responsible as they had had problems for a number of years, and he had seen Mr Collins in the area that evening while out walking his dogs.

Mr Loughnane contacted Mr Collins’ son and asked him to speak to his father, but he told him he would not get involved.

Mr Loughnane went to Mr Collins’ residence, but he wasn’t there.

At home he spoke to his girlfriend, his daughter and her boyfriend, Simon McCarthy, in the car when he saw Mr Collins driving toward his farm yard.

Mr Loughnane told the court he asked Mr McCarthy to accompany him as a witness and followed Mr Collins.

At Mr Collins farmyard, Mr Loughnane confronted Mr Collins on why he threw dog waste at his house but Mr Collins denied his involvement.

Mr Loughnane told the court that when he insisted that he had thrown the excrement, Mr Collins got out of his van and punched him.

Mr Loughnane said he was struck five times by Mr Collins and this resulted in damage to his teeth.

He told the court that Mr McCarthy had intervened and Mr Collins fell against his van.

Mr Loughnane said he became “concerned” for Mr Collins and attempted to help him up.

Then, he said, Mr Collins went to the back of his van and produced a rifle, which he pointed at both men, who fled.

JUST A HURLEY

Solicitor acting for Mr Collins, Patrick Kennedy, asked Mr Loughnane how he had seen the gun in the dark.

Mr Loughnane said that a sensor light illuminated the area, and he could see it clearly enough to describe it.

“When someone points a gun at you, you don’t know if it’s real or fake, so you just take cover,” said Mr Loughnane.

However, Mr Collins said in his evidence that there was no sensor light and that he had been illuminating his land with his van lights.

Mr Collins told the court that he did not produce a rifle but a hurley.

He said he could not have assaulted Mr Loughnane because he had recently had rotator cuff surgery and lacked the strength in his arm.

He said at 71, and following surgery, his mobility would not have allowed for sprinting.

When asked if he threw dog excrement at the co-accused house, Mr Collins said:

“No, jesus, I have better things to do.”

He told the court that while he owned a rifle, he would carry a “gun like that” at night.

Mr Collins gave evidence that he was about to run his greyhounds in his field when he saw two headlights approaching and two men jump out of a car “shouting and roaring”.

He said he defended himself and that there was a physical altercation between Mr Loughnane and himself, but it was “handbag stuff”.

However, after Mr McCarthy had hit him, he had fallen against his van.In order to stop the fight, he told the court he had threatened to pull a gun.

“When I mentioned the gun, they were gone,” said Mr Collins.

He told the court that he had gone to the back of his vehicle but only produced a hurley.

Mr Collins had not reported the incident for eight days, and when Judge MacGrath asked him why not he said he “couldn’t be bothered”.

He told the court that his solicitor advised him that if there was a gun involved, not to make a statement.
‘Muddying the Waters’

Solicitor for Mr Simon McCarthy, Paddy Cadell, said that Mr Collins’ story was inconsistent.

He argued that it made no sense that farmers would not have a sensor light in an area he used regularly at night.

Furthermore, he told the court that it made no sense to produce the hurley after the two men had fled.

He asked Mr Collins how he had known a gun was involved before the gardaí spoke to him.

However, Mr Collins clarified that he spoke to a solicitor after Mr Loughnane had reported being assaulted, and the gardaí had spoken to him.

That is when he made a counter report, which Mr Cadell called “muddying the waters”.

INTERVENTION

Mr McCarthy gave evidence that he was visiting his girlfriend when her father, Mr Loughnane, had asked him to accompany him to confront Mr Collins. He told the court that Mr Collins had started “throwing punches” and he had broken up the fight.

He said he got between the two men and pushed them apart with “closed fists”.

This, he said, is how Mr Collins had fallen.

He told the court that Mr Loughnane had attempted to help Mr Collins to his feet when Mr Collins “sprinted” to the back of the vehicle and produced the gun.

“He moved fairly lively for a 70-year-old man,” said Mr McCarthy.

When asked if it could have been a hurley and not a rifle, Mr McCarthy responded:

“What kind of hurley has a scope.”

SEIZURE

The court heard that after both Mr Loughnane and Mr Collins reported being assaulted, a garda member was assigned to investigate.

The investigating guard said he took statements from all parties and seized a rifle from Mr Collins.

However, he said he did not recall if the rifle had a scope as described by Mr Loughnane.

Acting on behalf of Mr Loughnane, Pádraig de Búrca BL argued that there was no evidence that Mr Loughnane had assaulted

Mr Collins and applied to the judge to dismiss the charge.

Inspector James White, acting for the State, said he agreed with Mr de Búrca’s assessment.

As did Judge MacGrath, who dismissed the assault charge against Mr Loughnane.

JUDGEMENT

Following some consideration and a review of the legislation of justifiable force, Judge Elizabeth MacGrath said that she was satisfied that Mr McCarthy had accompanied Mr Loughnane as a witness and had “no skin in the game”.

She said she was satisfied that his intention was to prevent further harm to Mr Loughnane and dismissed the case against Mr McCarthy.

In the case of Mr Collins the judge said that Mr Loughnane “had the belief, though not proven,” that his house had been defaced, and he had decided to take Mr Collins “to task”.

She said she was satisfied that Mr Collins had reacted and threw punches.

However, she said that the incident was at night and in the dark, and although Mr Collins had “over reacted”, she believed that he felt he had no choice.

She dismissed the assault charge against Mr Collins but convicted him of aiming the gun at Mr Loughnane and Mr McCarthy.

Judge MacGrath said it didn’t make sense to get the hurley from the van when the two men had fled.

RESOLUTION

Mr Kennedy made an application for the court to consider the Probation Act.

He said his client is 71 years of age, with no previous convictions and had felt that he was under threat on the night of the incident.

He called the incident an “unfortunate situation between neighbours”.

“You don’t want a conviction at 71,” said Mr Kennedy.

However, Judge MacGrath said she was concerned that the issues between the parties began in 2016. She proposed that all parties engage with the Restorative Justice Programme.

“I prefer to see the underlying issue resolved,” said Judge MacGrath.

All parties told the court that they agreed that the Restorative Justice process was an acceptable resolution to the dispute.

Mr Loughnane told the court that he and his family just “wanted to be left alone” and would work with the programme if Mr Collins would engage in a “meaningful way”.

The judge told Mr Collins:

“It has to be meaningful. It’s not a get-out-of-jail-free-card. It must be a meaningful process.”

Judge MacGrath adjourned the case until February 2024 to allow the parties time to work through the Restorative Justice process.