LAST UPDATE | 30 Jan 2021

A MAN who was charged with the murder of a schoolboy in Dublin last week has been remanded in custody.

The boy suffered fatal injuries and was rushed to the Mater Hospital but was later pronounced dead.

The secondary schoolboy cannot now be identified due to a court order based on a recent ruling prohibiting the news media from identifying deceased child victims.

However, when the case came before Dublin District Court today, the presiding judge extended anonymity to the adult accused despite pleas from the media to set out the basis for that decision.

The man, who is in his mid-thirties, was charged this afternoon and brought to appear before Judge John Campbell at Dublin District Court.

The accused was charged with murder of the boy and production of a knife during a dispute.

At the start of the hearing, Judge Campbell told reporters: “There are reporting restrictions with respect to the accused, and the the victim.”

The man, dressed in a blue jacket and cream trousers, listened to the proceedings with the aid of an interpreter. He has not yet indicated how he will plead.

The teenage boy’s mother watched on silently from the back of the courtroom. She wore a T-shirt with a slogan calling for justice for her son.

Detective Sergeant Shane Noone told Judge John Campbell that he charged the man at 1.47pm.

The defendant made “no reply” to the murder charge and in response to the weapon allegation, he answered: “This is the charge, or this is the final decision.”

Detective Sergeant Noone made an application under section 252 of the Children Act for the media to be prohibited from naming victim.

A bail application in a murder case can only be heard by the High Court.

Defence counsel Barry Ward, instructed by solicitor Sinead Mulhall, said his client was not a person of means. Legal aid was granted.

The accused, who did not address the court, was remanded in custody to appear via video-link at Cloverhill District Court on Thursday.

Solicitor Fergus Foody, on behalf of Independent News & Media (INM), then made an application in relation to the anonymity order.

He asked the judge to clarify one aspect of his reporting restriction ruling. Section 252 applied in relation to the deceased, he said, but the basis for no identification of the accused was not clear, he submitted.

“My view, is that the identification of the accused could give way to identification of the victim, and the victim must be protected,” the judge replied.

“In my view, the name of the accused should be prohibited,” he continued.

The INM solicitor said that he had not been given any basis at which the judge replied, “I have made my decision”, and he left the bench.