The presiding judge in the trial of four men accused of falsely imprisoning and attacking a man has warned the alleged victim that he is obliged to answer questions or he could face contempt of court proceedings.
Barry Moore, 34, who was allegedly beaten and branded with the word 'rat', has repeatedly refused to give evidence before the non-jury Special Criminal Court and has already been in custody for two nights.
He was refused bail this afternoon and further remanded in custody until Monday.
Mr Moore is the main witness in the trial of Jason Hennessy Junior, 28, and Brandon Hennessy, 22, of Sheephill Avenue, Blanchardstown in Dublin, along with Kenneth Fitzsimons, 45, and his son, Dean Fitzsimons, 26, of Castlecurragh Vale, Mulhuddart in Dublin 15.
They are all charged in relation to the alleged assault and false imprisonment of Mr Moore on 15 February 2025 at a house on Sheephill Avenue in Blanchardstown.
The men have pleaded not guilty to all charges against them and were present in court during most of the legal argument today.
Ms Justice Karen O'Connor said Mr Moore's status in this trial was one of complainant in relation to serious allegations of criminal wrongdoing.
Following today's hearing, she remanded him in custody ahead of legal argument in this trial, which will continue on Monday from 11.30am.
However, Judge O'Connor made a request to State authorities that they continue to review the matter of his incarceration and make inquiries as to whether protective custody is an option.
Earlier, she said this was a very unusual case and she had to consider whether the witness can be taken into protective custody rather than incarcerated.
Speaking via video link, Mr Moore confirmed that it was correct that he would not give evidence in the trial or participate in cross-examination.
Asked whether he had access to his own legal advice and whether he understood that he was obliged to answer questions in a criminal trial, he replied: "I do, judge."
He said he also understood that there can be consequences to this including that he be held in contempt of court, which could lead to incarceration and charges being brought against him.
Prosecuting counsel Garnett Orange SC said he was anxious to avoid what is known as secondary traumatisation through Mr Moore's continued incarceration.
Mr Orange said his instructions were that the Director of Public Prosecutions was not asking the court to exercise its powers, compelling Mr Moore to give evidence.
Prosecuting counsel said Mr Moore had clearly expressed his unwillingness to give evidence in the trial. He said probably for good reasons, he had made it clear that he would not give direct evidence and he was unlikely to change his mind,
However, during legal argument today, Judge Sarah Berkeley asked about the defence's right to cross examine.
Prosecuting counsel Mr Orange said that protective custody was not a straightforward issue that could be put in place and that this issue was a late development and something that had not been anticipated. He said the DPP was not seeking to compel Mr Moore's further attendance.
Judge Karen O'Connor said this was not something that had just arisen and it was not entirely clear how, even if the court wanted to, that it could say Mr Moore did not need to attend court anymore.
From the defence point of view, she said, cross-examination was a requirement for the trial.
Judge Berkeley said the accused must enjoy the presumption of innocence.
The presiding judge Ms Justice O'Connor said it appeared that it would take some time before the court could fully return to the "trial proper" and she said it would not be necessary for Mr Moore to attend during the ongoing legal argument next week.
Carol Doherty BL, representing Mr Moore, made an application for continued legal aid. She said she had concerns in relation to his detention in prison and her application for a senior counsel to be appointed to represent him in this case was granted by the court.
