Judge to decide next month if Áras Attracta footage admissible

Six staff from Swinford, Co Mayo care facility alleged to have assaulted residents

A judge will decide next month if covertly captured video footage from the Áras Attracta care facility will be admissible when six staff members go on trial charged with assaulting residents.

The preliminary hearing for the cases related to the alleged incidents involving six workers at the facility in Swinford, Co Mayo will take place on October 5th.

District Court Judge Mary Devins will then rule on the admissability of some 190 hours of TV footage and some 10,000 pages of documentation. The video evidence was filmed as part of an RTÉ Prime Time investigation.

Judge Devins will also rule at the preliminary hearing whether the cases against the six defendants should be held separately or together.

READ MORE

The six accused are: Joan Gill, Dublin Road, Swinford; Patrick McLoughlin, Lalibella, Mayfield, Claremorris; Christina Delaney, Seefin, Lissatava, Hollymount; Kathleen King, Knockshanbally, Straide, Foxford; Joan Walsh, Carrowilkeen, Curry, Co Sligo; and Anna Ywunsong Botsimbo, Lowpark Avenue, Charlestown.

Ms Gill faces five charges of assault at Bungalow 3, Áras Attracta. The assaults are alleged to have taken place on dates between November 6th and 17th, 2014.

The five other staff members face one charge of assault each.

Peter Flynn, lawyer for one of the accused, told the court there were a number of issues surrounding the footage that has been disclosed, including queries surrounding data protection and where cameras had been positioned .

Mr Flynn also raised concerns about the disclosure of the contents of Hiqa reports which were completed after charges had been brought against the defendants.

State Solicitor for Mayo Vincent Deane told the court a huge volume of material had been disclosed but he warned there was a danger of running the entire trial as a preliminary issue.

Mr Deane also said defence teams had raised concerns as to whether their clients had a constitutional expectation of privacy in the workplace.