Man who damaged front door of his ex-partner’s home while she and her children were present receives suspended sentence

By Eimear Dodd

A Dublin man who damaged the front door of his ex-partner’s home while she and her children were present has walked free from court after being handed a suspended prison sentence.

The 33-year-old man, who can’t be named to avoid identifying the children, pleaded guilty to criminal damage and trespass at an address in Dublin on December 1, 2021.

Passing sentence today, Judge Dara Hayes said this would have been a “terrifying experience” for the victim and her children.

“It is not an excuse to say his behaviour was out of character; it should not have happened in any circumstances,” Judge Hayes added.

He imposed a prison sentence of 18 months, which he suspended on full on strict conditions.

Judge Hayes noted that the victim is not afraid of the accused and they have no contact.

Dublin Circuit Criminal Court heard that the accused and his ex-partner were in a relationship for three years and he has a “parental role” for one of her two young children.

On the night in question, he contacted his ex-partner, asking to visit to see the children.

The injured party sent the accused a WhatsApp message stating the children were asleep in bed.

When the accused arrived, he knocked on the door and made calls to her, which she didn’t answer.

He kept banging on the door, then pushed it, damaging the lock and a glass pane.

The accused entered the house and the victim ran upstairs.

The injured party shouted to the accused that she would call gardaí.

The man then left the house, and was not at the scene when gardaí arrived.

He presented himself to the garda station later that evening.

During interview, the accused made full admissions that he was at the address and had contacted the injured party about the children.

€547 worth of damage was caused to the front door. Images of the damage were shown to the court.

The man has two previous convictions for minor road traffic offences dating back 12 years.

The investigating garda agreed with defence counsel that there is no suggestion that her client shouted at the victim.

The garda said the victim had ran upstairs, believing the accused was behind her. It is accepted that the accused did not chase her.

Defence counsel put it to the garda that a neighbour of the victim had called to check on her.

The garda agreed the accused had not caused difficulty for the neighbour when he was standing outside the property.

The injured party read her victim impact statement to the court.

She said this incident took place close to Christmas and she should have been “preparing for Santa”.

Instead, she had to repair the glass and lock on her front door.

The victim said one of her children had asked “why did a man who loved us so much do this?”. The child’s innocence was “taken away” that day, she added.

She said she is not the same person as she was 12 months on from this incident. The victim said she is now “strong and happy”, which the accused cannot take away from her.

Defence counsel said her client had knocked on the door for  45 seconds during which he saw one of the children sitting on the steps, but they did not come down.

Her client then saw the victim come towards the front door. There was a dispute between the pair through the front door.

She said her client accepts he caused the damage to the front door, but was not expecting his hand to go through the glass and was shocked when it happened.

Defence counsel said the accused entered the house, intending to talk to the injured party, but “held his hands up” when he realised the upset he’d caused.

Her client had remained outside the property for five minutes, waiting for gardaí, He then left to calm dow, before presenting himself at the garda station voluntarily.

Defence counsel said her client wished to apologise and had brought a cheque to cover the damage caused to the door.

This was an isolated incident and her client incorrectly decided to go to the victim’s home. Her client acknowledged that he had frightened his ex-partner and her children.

She asked Judge Hayes to consider giving her client the benefit of the Probation Act, which would leave him without a conviction.

Judge Hayes said he did not consider the use of the Probation Act appropriate in this case, given the nature of the offending. He said he would treat the accused as if of “previous good character” due to the minor nature of his previous convictions.

Judge Hayes noted the aggravating factors include the “serious nature” of the offence, the relationship between the accused and the injured party and the impact of the incident on the victim and her children.

He said the man’s guilty plea and his expressions of remorse are among the mitigating factors in the case. Judge Hayes imposed the 18 month suspended sentence on the criminal damage count, with the remaining count taken into consideration.