Kildare judge grills Tusla worker and garda during emergency court application

A Naas District Court judge was visibly angry at both a Tusla representative and a garda during an emergency court application.

Judge Desmond Zaidan was critical of the representative and garda during the application, which was heard in-camera (in private) on Thursday, March 21 last.

The court was told that the application concerned a teenage girl who was at risk of becoming homeless, as she had been kicked out of the family home.

A few minutes prior to the application, which was heard at around 3pm, Judge Zaidan announced that he would have to block adjourn the rest of the cases for the day due to the emergency nature of the application.

He told one solicitor in open court: "It (the incident which prompted the emergency application) probably only happened a few days ago... just you wait and see."

When the Tusla worker approached the judge, she told him that a garda enacted Section 12 of the Children's Act the previous day, at 4pm.

In summary, this provision of the Act refers to the power of An Garda Síochána to take a child to safety, if they have reasonable grounds to believe that the child is at risk or is in danger.

Judge Zaidan asked the Tusla worker: "Why wait until now, why not come in at 9am or 10am? Instead, you come in and disrupt my entire list; just because it suits Tusla!"

This week's LEINSTER LEADER is in shops and online at www.leinsterleader.ie

All the local news for Kildare

"I'm grateful for the court making time (for Tusla)," the worker said, to which Judge Zaidan replied: "Well, I'm not."

The judge further said: "You guys were aware of all of this since 4pm yesterday, you come in and throw my list into disarray, you should have come first thing in the morning!

"This is just abusing my time... get on with, please," he said, and requested the worker to call the garda to the stand.

After the garda gave a brief outline of the incident, and explained that he had spoken with the girl's mother, the judge asked him to show him the mother's statement.

However, when the garda replied that he didn't have it, Judge Zaidan said: "You had all night and morning, I need it in writing.

"It's not good enough... how am I meant to test your credibility?

"This didn't happen half an hour ago, it happened at 4pm yesterday! You are abusing your dominant position."

"That wasn’t my intention, judge," the garda responded.

"It's not good enough, you're a member of the gardaí."

"Sorry judge," the garda replied.

He added: "I didn't know that there was an emergency care order in place."

"When did you find out?" Judge Zaidan asked him.

"10am."

PICTURES: Launch of ‘On the Banks of the Liffey'- A History of the Dominican College, Newbridge

The launch took place in Newbridge Silverware on Wednesday night

Work to start on 17 new bedrooms for Kildare hotel

The judge also chastised the garda for not asking him for permission to refer to his notebook.

As a result, the judge ordered him to 'start the evidence from scratch.'

The Tusla worker then asked the garda why they enacted Section 12, and the garda explained that the girl was kicked out of her home, and has nowhere else to stay.

"Is the mother here?" Judge Zaidan asked.

"No," said the garda.

"Then it's hearsay; it's inadmissible," the judge replied.

The Tusla worker told Judge Zaidan that the mother was contacted by a courier on behalf of Tusla, but refused to come down to court.

In response, the judge said: "You should have brought in an affidavit from the courier saying what happened. Do you see where I'm coming from?"

"Yes, judge," the Tusla worker replied.

"You don't have an affidavit, and the garda doesn't have evidence... it's appalling."

When the judge asked the garda where the girl was at present, he replied that she was in Tusla accommodation.

A youth worker also involved with assisting the teenager was called to the stand, but Judge Zaidan criticised the fact that her affidavit was not signed: "Seriously, guys... this is getting embarrassing; I have to accommodate you and your proofs are not in order," he remarked.

After consideration, the judge said that he would grant the order, owing to the fact that the girl doesn't have any other relatives she can stay with, and noted how she previously was in contact with the social worker even before the incident — "She is obviously a vulnerable young person, I can read between the lines," he said.

The judge granted an interim care order until the case resumes at a later date, but reiterated that he wasn't satisfied with the proofs not being in order.