A father, who allegedly dangled his son from a bridge over a flooding river, had access with him reduced at a District Family Court in a rural town on Thursday.
Letters were handed into the judge from the boy’s teacher, as part of the mother’s application to have the father’s access limited.
The letters outlined what the boy had told the teacher about being slapped by his father and about an incident on a bridge that occurred last year.
The court heard that the boy had been saying, since late last year, that his father had held him by the ankles over the bridge but had recently changed his story.
Giving evidence, the young boy’s mother said, after a recent access visit, the child told her his Dad had only lifted him up to show him the flood and had cradled him in his arms.
He told his mother: “Dad said I was confused and made a mistake.”
The court heard when the couple’s marriage broke down, the mother had moved out and it was agreed the children would live with the father.
But approximately a year later, the father had a nervous breakdown and called social services.
Two of the children now live with the mother, the court heard, while the eldest has returned to live with his father.
The mother said she feared there was “something wrong again”.
One son said his father had instructed him to say his mother had sprayed deodorant in his mouth, so that he could live with his father, the mother claimed.
“I don’t know what’s going on, I’m just terrified for my son,” she told the judge.
She said she was happy for overnight visits to continue with her teenager, who could stand up for himself, but the youngest child should not stay overnight with the father.
Stories
She also said her eldest son had phoned her and asked why she was making up stories about their father. The youngest child had then said he would ring his Dad and apologise to him, because he might be angry and “slap him in the face again”.
The father said he got on great with his youngest child. He told the judge he did not slap the boy and “the bridge thing didn’t happen like that at all”.
He said he “never said anything” to the boy about the bridge incident at his last overnight access.
The judge said he did not believe the father’s evidence about not talking of the bridge incident with his sons.
“It places a huge question mark over a lot of his evidence,” he said. He confirmed an order preventing overnight access with the youngest child.
Separate application
In a separate application, a father sought to increase access to his child. He said he was not allowed see his daughter when she was born.
He now saw her one afternoon a week and one overnight every other weekend, returning her at lunchtime on Sunday.
He agreed with a solicitor for the mother, who did not want access increased, that he had not been in a relationship with the mother when she became pregnant.
He denied asking her to have an abortion. He said the mother’s sister had demanded €700 from him “for an abortion” and he had given €400, but “the abortion was never done”.
He said he would like more access at weekends, and asked for an additional overnight.
The mother said she wanted the status quo to remain. She said her daughter had returned from access with a black eye and said her father had slapped her. Gardaí were investigating, her solicitor said.
The mother said she was very worried about overnights.
The judge increased access to 6pm every other Sunday, and changed the weekday access start time from September, when the child will begin school.
