The Minister for Justice Equality and Law Reform v Ostrovskij,  IEHC 427 (2005)
|Docket Number:||2005 58Ext|
THE HIGH COURT
Record Number: 2005 No. 58 Ext
The Minister for Justice, Equality and Law Reform
Judgment of Mr Justice Michael Peart delivered on the 20th December 2005:
The applicant was arrested here on foot of a European Arrest Warrant dated 7th July 2005 which issued in the requesting state of Lithuania. The offences relate to the alleged rape of a woman in Vilnius by the applicant and another man on the 29th May 2005.
The applicant would have been still seventeen years of age at the time of the alleged offences. In fact his sister who has given evidence has stated that he was still attending school until the 17th May 2005. He is now just eighteen years of age.
At any rate it appears that some five or six days after the alleged offence occurred, the applicant attended at Vilnius Airport where he purchased a return ticket to fly to Dublin that same day - the return ticket being for the 31st July 2005. At that stage the domestic warrant was not yet issued in Vilnius.
He apparently arrived here on the 5th June 2005. His sister was already residing here at Ballymahon, Co. Longford. It appears from the evidence of Sgt. O'Neill before me that his name did not appear on any government database until almost six months later when he applied for a PPS number on the 24th November 2005. It also appears that the applicant was able to fly here without any passport. He was in possession only of a national identity card.
The evidence has been that he worked on a farm here over the summer months picking strawberries, and that more recently he has been employed, as far as I can recall, at a Kepak premises in Athlone.
The applicant's sister has apparently been living here for a period of about two years. She has a daughter also, but it would appear that her daughter did not arrive here until the 4th November 2005 when the applicant's mother came to live here. They all live in an apartment at Ballymahon now, and I have heard evidence that the applicant assists towards the household budget from his wages.
The applicant's sister gave evidence that the applicant had bought the return ticket to Dublin so that he could return to Vilnius to continue his studies. But in cross-examination she also now says that he has changed his mind about that and will not now return to Vilnius to complete his studies. The applicant himself has not given oral evidence, but has sworn a grounding affidavit (upon which he has not...
To continue readingREQUEST YOUR TRIAL