Woman says she was not put under pressure to drop full barring order application against partner who had assaulted her

A woman who alleged violent behaviour by her partner during their relationship of several years has told a judge she was not pressurised to drop her application for a full barring order.

The mother of three got an interim barring order earlier this month over an alleged recent violent assault by her partner resulting in her suffering nose injuries after being “loafed” in the face.

An interim barring order is returnable within a maximum of eight days. When the case returned on Friday to the domestic violence court at Dolphin House, Dublin, the woman told Judge Gerard Furlong she was not pursuing a full barring order, with the effect the interim barring order lapses. The man was not in court.

The woman agreed with Judge Furlong she provided sworn information at the interim barring order hearing that the early March assault occurred after the man loudly called her abusive names and asked her to leave the rented home where the couple and children were living but which is leased in her name. She had said he told her to go and stay with her mother because he needed “time to himself” but she refused.

Table 45 review: Bar off Merrion Square transformed into new tapas restaurant full of home-made warmth

---

Inside the early morning operation to move asylum seekers from Mount Street encampment

---

Michael Harding: A funeral reminds me of the sweetness of silence, when conversation was more than just chatter

---

The Fall Guy review: Who ordered a half-baked revival of a Lee Majors TV show? Anyone?

---

The woman had said she asked the man to leave the house after he “kicked off” again the following morning, that he had said he would not and slapped her in the face before loafing her in the face, “busting” her nose. She said he had said: “I’m glad I did that to you”, before going outside to smoke.

Another person, out of concern for her, called gardaí who advised her to get a court order.

At the interim barring order hearing, the woman said the man had then left the house and that his abusive behaviour had been going on for six years. In an earlier incident, he threw her against a wall and busted her lip, her sworn information stated. He criticises her parenting and she is “scared and lonely”, has no friends “because he took them away from me” and, when on the bus, she had to text him where she was, she had said.

It had taken a lot for her to come to court, she told that hearing, but she could not take it any longer and was scared what he “might do to me”.

On Friday, Judge Furlong told the woman, based on her evidence in the inital application, he was “absolutely willing” to grant a three-year barring order.

What had changed in the past few days that had caused her to decide against pursuing the application, the judge asked, saying his concerns included the impact on the children of witnessing violence in the home.

The woman said the man is seeking help and is “not like that” to the children.

She said she would be happy to have a safety order but a barring order “might cause tensions”.

The judge told the woman she had built up courage to come to court before and he could see “no logical reason” why she would drop her application “unless you are under pressure”.

The woman denied she was under pressure or had been asked to drop her application. “I think he has realised he has been on a bad road and is getting help,” she said.

The judge said “help and change does not occur in eight working days” and the woman had just days ago been violently attacked. If she had a barring order, she could apply to have that lifted if she was satisfied after an appropriate period the man had changed, he said.

The woman confirmed she had some assistance from Women’s Aid before coming to court for the initial barring order but had not returned to them since. The judge suggested she discuss the matter with the service and adjourned the case to facilitate that.

When the case resumed later on Friday, he was told Women’s Aid was satisfied the woman genuinely did not wish to pursue the barring order application. The woman said that was the case and she would be happy with a safety order.

The judge made a safety order restraining violent or threatening behaviour by the man towards the woman and any of her children aged under 18.

Listen to our Inside Politics Podcast for the latest analysis and chat

• Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
• Find The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date