A woman, reportedly abducted and abused by a former partner, desperately sought assistance by knocking on automobile windows and smearing blood, a hearing was informed last Saturday. The woman reportedly managed to escape and hid behind hedges before running to a lorry depot for safety as James Martin Mulholland, who was purportedly attempting to find her, drove repeatedly up and down the street.
Mulholland, aged 52, standing in the court’s dock, affirmed his understanding of seven accusations levelled against him, including abduction, assault, bodily harm, criminal damage, reckless driving and violation of restraining order, all reportedly carried out on May 28th of the current year, along with an alleged domestic abuse offence committed between 15th and 18th May. Detective Constable Brown testified his believed link between Mulholland and each charge, affirming police objections to his bail due to fears of potential repeat offences or meddling with the plaintiff.
District Judge Peter Magill in his reading of the police case outline shared that the authorities were informed on Friday regarding an incident on Tuesday, when a dispute presumably erupted inside and outside The Thatch Bar between Mulholland and his ex. Mulholland pledged to take her home, but she declined to comply, opting to walk instead, only to be followed by him, who after forcing her into the car allegedly struck her face and bashed her head against the gear stick and window. According to the judge, mid-drive, Mulholland smothered her mouth, punched her and shouted at her while she defended herself, retaliating by biting his hand and hitting him twice before he grabbed her mobile. The judge noted that the entire scene unfolded while Mulholland continued driving erratically on the M2 motorway.
The purported victim understood that Mulholland planned to bring her to his residence, a prospect that made her fear for her safety. Reportedly, she urged him to cease, striking the car windows in a bid to catch the notice of other motorists whilst smearing the windows with blood. Once Mulholland pulled up outside his home and alighted the vehicle to unlatch the gate, the woman saw an opportunity to break away. She therefore opted to flee the vehicle and sprint along the secluded country path.
Mulholland called out, inviting her indoors for a coffee and the opportunity to clean herself up. However, she retorted sharply and sought refuge behind a shrub down the road, whilst Mulholland allegedly scoured for her, to no avail.
She found refuge at a nearby lorry depot where the occupants cloaked her presence from Mulholland, who was scouring the streets searching for her. A kind-hearted individual at the depot subsequently escorted her to a bus terminus and funded her commute home.
DC Brown informed the court of Mulholland’s prior conviction for ABH against the same female, citing a pattern of domestic abuse and voiced concerns over their inability to maintain their distance. Following his arrest, Mulholland professed his love for her, his desire to assist her, and his intention to marry her during the course of police questioning.
Acceding to the potential case against Mulholland, defence attorney Grant Powles maintained his client’s ‘right to be presumed innocent’. He suggested that restraining measures such as curfew and electronic monitoring could be imposed given the geographical distance between his residence in Antrim and hers in Belfast.
Relating Mulholland’s account, Powles conveyed that the woman had been distinctly agitated, causing disruption to steering, prompting him to physically restrain her, during their motorway drive. He went on to indicate Mulholland’s display of bite marks and scratches upon his body and arms. The barrister also underlined their four-decade-long relationship which has been turbulent.
Bringing attention to a potentially lengthy process before reaching the Crown Court, Mr. Powles proposed Mulholland might be considered for bail, adhering strictly to its terms, with the implication that any violations would result in a considerable stretch in custody.
Justice Magill informed the lawyer that despite having raised all conceivable issues, his plea held no potential viability, considering Mr Mulholland was already bound by both probation and restraining orders due to his past incident of ABH. “This individual poses a threat to society as he will inevitably seek her out, thus causing genuine concern about potential additional offences and meddling,” voiced the magistrate. He decided to hold Mulholland in detention and postponed the hearing till the 18th of June.