Greystones flasher (31) refused bail after gardaí claim he is serious flight risk
A man who admitted flashing at passers-by, including schoolchildren, in a number of incidents in the Greystones area of Co Wicklow last year has had an application for bail refused due to objections by gardaí.
Conor Wood (31), who comes originally from Clonroe, Gorey, Co Wexford, pleaded guilty to two charges of exposing his genitals intending to cause fear, distress or alarm to another person, contrary to Section 45 (1) of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2017 at a sitting of Wicklow Circuit Criminal Court.
Advertisement
The first incident occurred on a laneway at Greystones Golf Club, Whitshed Road, Greystones, Co Wicklow, on February 23rd, 2024.
The second offence took place at Cherry Orchard Lane, Killincarrig, Delgany, Co Wicklow on March 8th, 2024.
The court heard that Wood had also pleaded guilty at an earlier sitting of the court this year to a separate charge of engaging in sexual activity in the presence of a child contrary to Section 5 (1) of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2017 at Kilcoole Road, Greystones on January 11th, 2024.
Detective Garda Brian Shiels told the court that he was objecting to a bail application made by the defendant's lawyers on the grounds that he believed that Wood was a serious flight risk.
Advertisement
Det Garda Shiels gave evidence that gardaí already had to take out two bench warrants for the accused in September 2024 over his failure to appear in court including one sitting related to the current case.
The witness told the court that Wood had left the jurisdiction and was traced to Liverpool, England.
When contacted by gardaí, Det Garda Shiels said he told them he would not be returning to Ireland.
However, the court heard he had returned to Ireland unknown to gardaí until they were called to an incident in Gorey, Co Wexford, in April 2025 when Wood was arrested over some mental health concerns.
Advertisement
The outstanding bench warrant was executed after gardaí established his identity.
The court heard Wood had a number of previous convictions for robbery and public order offences.
In reply to questions from prosecution counsel James Kelly BL, Det Garda Shiels said he would have very serious concerns about the possibility of the defendant re-offending if he was granted bail.
He pointed out that two of the victims were just 11 and 16 years old who were walking to school in the morning and involved incidents which took place in secluded areas.
Advertisement
The court heard that Wood was living at two addresses in Greystones including at one property with his brother at the time of the offences.
The accused sat with his head bowed and held in his hands during most of the hearing.
Cross-examined by defence counsel Gregory Murphy BL, Det Garda Shiels said he would not be satisfied with the offer by Wood to surrender his passport and to sign on daily at a Garda station as he believed the accused would 'just disappear.'
The witness said there were no bail conditions which would satisfy him.
Advertisement
Rejecting the defence's bail application, Judge Terence O'Sullivan said the offences were not just an isolated incident.
The judge said he was satisfied there was a serious risk that Wood would not show up in court.
Ireland
Drug use, defecation and sexual assault: 4,300 mes...
Read More
He observed that there was 'something quite calculated' about the defendant's previous absences from attending court.
Judge O'Sullivan pointed out that Wood was traced to England but had made no arrangement with gardaí about his return to Ireland 'but just came to Garda attention in Gorey.'
He remanded the accused in custody for a sentencing hearing in early October.
The judge also acceded to a request by defence lawyers that a psychiatric report on the accused be ordered for the next sitting.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BreakingNews.ie
28 minutes ago
- BreakingNews.ie
Officers seize cannabis worth almost €3m in Limerick
Cannabis worth almost €3 million has been seized in Limerick. On Thursday, gardaí and Revenue officers seized 147kg of herbal cannabis with an estimated value of approximately €2,940,000 in the area. Advertisement Revenue said the seizure came as a result of a joint 'intelligence-led' operation conducted by the Customs Service, the Garda National Drugs and Organised Crime Bureau (GNDOCB) and Limerick Divisional Drugs Unit. This seizure is part of Revenue's ongoing joint investigations involving organised crime groups and the importation, sale and supply of illegal drugs. A spokesperson said: 'If businesses, or members of the public, have any information regarding drug smuggling, they can contact Revenue in confidence on phone number 1800 295 295.' Investigations are ongoing. Advertisement
BreakingNews.ie
an hour ago
- BreakingNews.ie
Man (63) wielded knife at asylum seeker in Dublin migrant camp
A dog walker was sentenced to three months in jail after being convicted of brandishing a knife at an asylum seeker in a Dublin migrant camp. Raymond Lawless (63), of St Andrew's Court, was found guilty of the production of a knife at Sandwith Street, both in Dublin 2, on May 8th, 2023. Advertisement He denied the offensive weapon charge but was found guilty by Judge John Hughes at Dublin District Court, handed a sentence, and fined €500. In evidence, the complainant said he was an asylum seeker who had been living in a tent in the encampment. He alleged: "This man came around chasing everybody in the place with a knife". He described it as a kitchen knife and recalled Lawless had his small Yorkshire terrier with him. Advertisement However, he said the accused threatened to return later with two bigger dogs to "chase us back to wherever we came from". The witness said he called gardaí to report the man coming into the camp to attack "me and two or three guys". He stated he tried to rescue his friends from Lawless. Cross-examined, he agreed he was intimidated not by the little dog with Lawless but because he said he would come back with two big dogs. Challenged over his knife claim, the defence barrister told the witness that Lawless had a trowel for cleaning up after his dog. Advertisement "It was a knife," he replied. Garda Alan Cawley obtained CCTV footage from the area and took statements. The video evidence was played during the hearing. Rejecting the accusation when he took the stand, Lawless insisted he just went out to walk his dog and had a small garden trowel to clean up after his pet. He said he vaguely remembered the day and denied having anything on him to frighten anyone. Advertisement Reacting to the complainant's evidence, Lawless said, "That's a complete lie; I deny that," adamant that he never went around carrying a knife. Questioned by the prosecutor, he confirmed he knew there was a refugee camp there because he lived across the road. He said he no longer had the trowel because the dog had died and got rid of all his pet's things. When told the item looked like a knife, he replied, "It may do, but I was not carrying a knife." He added that he never spoke to anyone in the camp. Advertisement Judge Hughes did not accept his account and said it was "abundantly clear" in the CCTV footage that he was carrying a silver, chrome and long knife distinct from a garden trowel. Ireland Minister for Justice 'confident' Government will h... Read More He noted that the accused had one previous conviction for assault causing harm, which led to a Circuit Court imposing an 18-month suspended sentence in 2012. The court heard he had been receiving cancer treatment. Judge Hughes imposed the fine and a nine-month sentence but suspended the final six months on condition he did not reoffend in two years, had no contact with the complainant, stayed away from Sandwith Street, and completed an anger-management course. Lawless was released after lodging appeal bail.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Firefighter who gave £45,000 of £200,000 scratchcard win to his 'spendaholic' ex-girlfriend fights her in court to get it back
A firefighter who sent £45,000 of his scratchcard win to his 'spendaholic' ex faced her in court to get the cash back. Craig Titchener, 36, took his ex Heather Douglass to court after she claimed he 'lovebombed' her with £45,000 worth of gifts because he was 'desperate' to keep her. The nurse claims the Heathrow Airport firefighter gave her a five-figure sum to spend on herself after his lucky win to 'get back into her good books' when they quarrelled. She said she splashed out thousands on exotic holidays, household renovations and other expensive items with her ex-partner's approval, adding that ADHD gave her 'an addiction to overspending'. The now-estranged couple ended up facing off in court over three cash transfers totalling £45,000 made by him to her in 2022. Ms Douglass insisted were 'outright gifts,' while he claimed they were for investing on his behalf. Mr Titchener sued, saying he had paid her the sums as he respected her financial 'savvy' and wanted her to plough the cash into premium bonds or other high-interest savings, with both of them sharing the interest. After three days in court, District Judge Charlotte Hart ruled that £40,000 of the money transferred was intended to be invested, as Mr Titchener claimed, and was not meant as a gift. Craig Titchener, 36, took his ex to court after she claimed he 'lovebombed' her with £45,000 worth of gifts because he was 'desperate' to keep her Craig Titchener, 36, took his ex to court after she claimed he 'lovebombed' her with £45,000 worth of gifts because he was 'desperate' to keep her However, she went on to find that a third £5,000 cash transfer was a gift as claimed by Ms Douglass, intended as a thank you from Mr Titchener for her support during their relationship, along with a £300 bottle of Lancôme perfume. Airport firefighter Mr Titchener scored his big win after gambling on a Winter Wonderlines scratchcard in 2019, pocketing the top prize of £200,000. He told the court he wanted to use the money to buy a house for him and his children, but that after beginning a 'volatile' 11-month relationship with Miss Douglass, he handed her £45,000 of his cash in 2022. After they split, he began his Central London County Court bid to retrieve his cash, telling the judge that he had expected Miss Douglass to invest it for him. 'I am someone who has always fought hard for a better life, for both myself and my children,' he told the judge. 'When I won that £200,000 on the scratchcard, I didn't see it as just luck but as a life-changing opportunity. 'I thought that now I can finally buy the family home I've always wanted, and that intention to invest in a home has been consistent from the start.' But Miss Douglass fought the case, asserting that the payments were gifts, claiming that her ex 'lovebombed' her with generous presents and cash to 'get back into her good books' when they quarrelled, telling Mr Titchener: 'You sent me money because you were desperate to be in a relationship with me'. With both sides representing themselves in court and sitting just yards apart in a cramped courtroom, Mr Titchener challenged his former partner as she gave evidence, asking: 'Why would I have transferred half of my life savings just to be in a relationship with you?' She replied: 'You want women to be with you, and you struggle when you're on your own. 'You're very controlling and this was a relationship wholly based on control. You believe that you can buy people.' Miss Douglass, who suffers from ADHD, told the judge that she had spent much of the money with Mr Titchener's agreement, including on a Thai holiday for them both, household work and other items. 'Part of my diagnosis is that I have an addiction to overspending,' she told the court. 'When I'm elated I will buy extravagant things. I have a tendency to overspend. If you came to my house, you'd see there are things coming there every day.' Giving judgment, the judge said there was 'very little evidence to support claims of a controlling or harassing relationship' and ruled that Ms Douglass had failed to prove that the £40,000 was gifted to her. But she held that Mr Titchener had also tried to bolster his case by concocting a digital document which he claimed was a signed agreement between him and Miss Douglass confirming that the transferred money was earmarked for investment. 'I think he created that document to support his genuine case that the money was not outright gifted, but given to use for the purpose of investment,' said the judge. But although labelling this 'extremely damaging to the claimant's credibility,' Judge Hart said it did not alter the central fact that Mr Titchener had transferred the cash sums for investment purposes. 'There will be judgment for Mr Titchener with a sum to be assessed by an equitable account, she added. 'It's declared that £40,000 was transferred by the claimant to the defendant and held in a bare trust for his benefit, to be invested in premium bonds or high interest savings.' On top of the disputed money, the pair also ended up bickering over a 500ml 'prestige' bottle of Lancôme perfume, which Mr Titchener likewise labelled an investment, while Ms Douglass said it was a gift of her favourite scent. Mr Titchener said the scent, bought for around £300 at auction. was 'a prestige bottle bought with the intention of investment,' but Ms Douglass said she wore the perfume 'all the time' and that her ex had told her his car 'smells like you now' after a similar bottle leaked in it. 'I used this perfume throughout my relationship with him,' she said in her closing arguments to the court. Finding against Mr Titchener in relation to the 'limited edition' perfume, the judge decided this was a present from the firefighter, saying: 'It's conceded that this is Ms Douglass' perfume of choice and on the balance of probabilities I find that this was a gift.' Although Mr Titchener had launched his bid to retrieve his cash transfers, the judge decided there must be a further court hearing to determine whether Ms Douglass may have spent some of her ex's £40,000 stake with his consent. The case will return to court for an investigation into where the £40,000 went, the judge noting that some £19,000 is still not accounted for, although £21,000 had been traced going into Ms Douglass' savings accounts.
