Man found guilty of noise-provoked assault on neighbour

Monday 19 June 2017

A fifty-nine year old man who was alleged to have punched and pulled a neighbour down a flight of stairs after complaining that his building works had become too “noisy,” has been found guilty of common assault.

Frank O’Neil faced a Magistrate's Court trial on Friday in which he denied accusations of “harassment” brought by what his lawyer described as three “bullies” – the alleged victim, his brother, and a friend - who were all employed by the victim's building company at the time.

The trio argued that they had been working on renovating a Clearview Street property neighbouring Mr O’Neil’s flat one February evening when Mr O'Neill entered – uninvited – to ask what time the works would be completed.

When the property owner and lead builder, who was varnishing stairs at the time, stated that it would be a few weeks longer, Mr O’Neil was said to have shouted, “You’re taking the p***” and, “Who the f*** do you think you are?” before pulling him down the stairs with such force that it apparently left the victim “dangling”  several feet above ground, hanging onto the unfinished balustrade.

“I told him to get out, he said something along the lines of, ‘Make me.’ That’s when he grabbed me and tried pulling me, and I sort of swung round… That’s when I felt a blow to the back of the head,” the victim recalled.

He was left with a minor neck injury, while his friend suffered a sprained wrist after attempting to intervene.

But Advocate Sarah Dale, defending, pointed to several inconsistencies in the witnesses’ accounts, stating that they became, “…sketchy on the details” of what immediately preceded and succeeded the “fracas.” She added that if there had really been a scuffle on the stairs as claimed, that the wet varnish would have been trodden on.

She argued that they had actively tried to avoid giving evidence in court over fears about, “…maintaining the lies told.” The Court heard that the trio had booked a trip to Thailand on the day of the trial, only agreeing to reschedule their flights and give evidence after being threatened with arrest for being, “…in contempt of court.”

Pictured: The Magistrate's Court, where the trial was heard by Relief Magistrate Nuno Santos-Costa.

Advocate Dale hinted at “collusion” between the trio in an attempt to “protect” the victim’s brother, who had been ordered to “keep out of trouble” in court just one week earlier.

“The three of you came up with story that Mr O’Neil had assaulted you to protect you and to protect [the victim’s brother]… That’s why you lied to the police and you’ve lied to people today,” she said.

Moreover, she stated that Mr O’Neil couldn’t have committed the assault due to the fact he is disabled in the arm he apparently used to punch his neighbour, following an accident that put an end to his welding career. She added that he took regular medication after suffering a heart attack less than a decade ago and that, on the night of the incident, he was, “…so unwell with flu that Police didn’t detain him that night.”

“If you had known this, you would have known how implausible your story is,” Advocate Dale said.

Mr O’Neil told the Court that it was he who had been assaulted, allegedly with a violent push down the stairs in which he fell on top of the property owner’s brother.

He said that he had already made numerous complaints about the building noise, which often extended into anti-social hours, and that he had only made the decision to go around after six failed calls to the Centenier that night.

Prosecuting Advocate Carvalho stated, “You didn’t intend to have a quiet word with him, did you? …That cannot be interpreted as anything other than a threat.”

“I couldn’t fight sleep, so there was no threat of violence or nothing like that,” Mr O’Neil later responded.

 
Pictured: Outside the Clearview Street properties, where the assault occurred. (Photo: Google Maps)

He said that during his fall, his keys fell out of his pocket, which the brother later took and “taunted” him with throughout the following week, “jangling them” and “making fun” of him. Speaking to the Police following the incident, Mr O’Neil said that he would be willing to drop the charges on return of the keys, but in an “unbelievable” turn of events, he was arrested after the trio made a counterclaim of assault.

He told the Court that he remained confused “to this day” as to how this occurred, with Advocate Dale reasoning that it could only be due to the, “…witness ratio of three-to-one.”

“The easiest theory is to believe the version of events that the three put forward… That is the trap that the police fell into, that is the trap that the prosecution has fallen into, and I would urge you not to fall into the same trap,” she advised presiding Relief Magistrate Nuno Santos-Costa.

Nonetheless, he found Mr O’Neil guilty, but reassured him, “…I don’t believe for a moment this crosses the custody threshold.” 

Sentencing will occur on Tuesday.