8
Dundalk Leader 27th May 2026
Dundalk set to honour The Corrs Man who stole alcohol given opportunity to avoid conviction A MAN who admitted stealing two bottles of vodka was given the opportunity to avoid a conviction at Dundalk District Court. Arturas Petraitis, Castletown Road, Dundalk, pleaded guilty to theft on April 9th this year at Dunnes Stores,
Marshes Shopping Centre. The items were valued at €66. Solicitor Niall Breen stated that his 62-year-old client had come a long way without a conviction and that he had been struggling with alcohol. He asked the court to
leave Mr Petraitis without a conviction. Judge Stephanie Coggans put the case back to September 16th and stated that it would be struck out of a €100 donation was made to charity.
Woman was abusive to Gardaí
The Corrs (Sharon Corr, Jim Corr, Andrea Corr and Caroline Corr) will be given a Civic Reception A DUNDALK woman who was abusive to Gardai outside her in Dundalk this Friday evening. home was given the chance to LOUTH County Council are classic ‘Dreams’ Their debut official unveiling of the recentavoid a conviction at Dundalk set to host a Civic Reception in album ‘Forgiven, Not Forgot- ly completed Corrs mural at District Court by making a dohonour of The Corrs, one of ten’ was released in September the Longwalk Dundalk which nation to the Court Poor Box Dundalk, County Louth and 1995 and has since sold over will be followed by an exhibiafter pleading guilty to public Ireland’s most successful and 3.3 million copies worldwide. tion in the County Museum order charges. The Corrs from Ard Eas- before the Civic Reception much loved bands. Donna Rogers of Moorland The event will take place on muinn were inspired to go into takes place later that evening Row, Armagh Road, Dundalk, Friday, 29 May, in An Táin Arts the music business through in the Town Hall. was told by Judge Stephanie their parents Gerry and Jean Centre, Town Hall, Dundalk. Event Details Dundalk Coggans that she would adThe Corrs which comprise who performed as a group in BIDS: Official Viewing of The of siblings Caroline (drums), Dundalk for many years under Corrs Mural; Venue: LongAndrea (lead vocals), Sharon the name ‘Sound Affair’. While (violin) and Jim (guitar) are the events are primarily for in- walk, Dundalk; Time: 2.30pm. Exhibition: ‘All The Way undoubtedly the most success- vited guests only there will be a Home’ A Celebration of The A 47-YEAR-old man was givful group to come from Dun- limited number of people from dalk have had a number of the general public there thanks Corrs; Venue: County Mu- en a one-week sentence after massive hits around the world to a draw which took place on seum, Dundalk; Time: 3.30pm pleading guilty to a public orCivic Reception. Venue: An der offence at Dundalk District including Runaway, Breath- Monday through Louth CounTáin Arts Centre, Doors Court. less, So Young and their ver- ty Council. Robert Maguire of St Helena sion of the Fleetwood Mac Friday’s events will see the open: 6.45pm.
journ the case to September 16th this year when the matter will be struck out if she makes a payment of €200. Court Presenter Richie Browne outlined that at 10.35 on March 5th this year, Gardai were called to Dundoogan, Clermont Road, Dundalk, and discovered Ms Rogers outside where she was unsteady and shouting. She called one Garda
a ‘wee bitch’ and her to ‘f*** off’, The defendant failed to leave as directed and was arrested after she continued to be aggressive. Solicitor Peter Lavery stated that his 49-year-old client had apologised for her actions on the night. He stated that she had been doing well with alcohol prior to this episode, and has been doing well since.
Intoxicated on Church Street Park, Fair Green Road, was arrested after Gardai found him intoxicated and lying on Church St on September 29th, 2025. Solicitor Conor MacGuill
stated that his client, who is currently serving a sentence, pleaded guilty to the offence. Judge Stephanie Coggans convicted the defendant and imposed a one-week sentence.
Contempt of Court: The Law You Could Break Without Realising By Darren Crawley IT is often said that ignorance of the law is no defence, but there are few areas where this feels more true than contempt of court. Unlike many legal issues, contempt does not require elaborate planning or deliberate wrongdoing. In fact, it is entirely possible to commit it accidentally, particularly in today’s world of instant communication. For communities like Dundalk, where local cases can quickly become the subject of public discussion, understanding this area of law is more important than ever. At its simplest, contempt of court refers to behaviour that interferes with the administration of justice or undermines the authority of the court. It is not a single offence but a category of actions that can arise in different ways, some obvious, others less so. One of the most common forms is known as “sub judice” contempt. This occurs when someone comments publicly on a case that is ongoing or
pending before the courts in a way that could influence its outcome. Traditionally, this applied to newspapers and broadcasters. Today, however, social media has expanded the scope dramatically. A post, comment, or even a shared article expressing an opinion about a live case could potentially fall into this category. Consider a situation where a local case is being heard at Dundalk Courthouse. It might be tempting for members of the public to discuss it online, especially if it involves someone known in the community. However, speculating about guilt, sharing unverified information, or attempting to sway opinion can risk interfering with the fairness of proceedings. The key principle is that cases should be decided in court, based on evidence presented, not influenced by public commentary. Another form of contempt arises from disobeying court orders. This could include failing to comply with a directive, such as ignoring an order to produce documents,
breaching an injunction, or refusing to follow the terms of a judgment. While this may sound more deliberate, there are instances where individuals underestimate the seriousness of such orders, treating them as optional rather than legally binding. There is also contempt in the face of the court, sometimes referred to as “in facie curiae.” This involves behaviour that disrupts proceedings directly—such as refusing to remain silent, acting aggressively, or otherwise undermining the authority of the judge. While less common, it highlights the expectation that courtrooms remain controlled
and respectful environments. The consequences of contempt can be significant. Courts have the power to impose fines or even imprisonment, depending on the severity of the conduct. Importantly, these penalties are not about punishment alone, they are about protecting the integrity of the legal system. Without safeguards against interference, the fairness of trials could be compromised. In Ireland, the administration of justice is overseen through institutions such as The Courts Service of Ireland, but the responsibility for respecting the process extends to everyone. Whether attend-
ing court, reporting on proceedings, or simply discussing a case, individuals play a role in upholding these standards. What makes contempt particularly challenging is the line between legitimate discussion and unlawful interference. People are entitled to express opinions and engage in public debate. However, once a case becomes active, those freedoms are balanced against the right to a fair trial. This balance is not always obvious, which is why caution is essential. For Dundalk residents, the practical advice is straightforward. If a case is ongoing, avoid commenting on it publicly—especially in a way that suggests an outcome or introduces new information. Be mindful that social media posts are not private, even if shared within a limited circle. And if attending court, follow directions carefully and respect the formality of the setting. There is also a broader lesson about how the legal system functions. Courts rely not
only on laws and procedures but also on public cooperation. The concept of contempt exists to ensure that justice is administered fairly, free from external pressure or disruption. In a close-knit community, where news travels quickly and opinions are often shared freely, this can require a conscious effort. The instinct to discuss local matters is natural, but when those matters enter the courtroom, a different standard applies. Ultimately, contempt of court is less about catching people out and more about preserving fairness. It serves as a reminder that the justice system depends on respect, for the process, for the parties involved, and for the principle that decisions should be made based on evidence, not influence. In that sense, the safest approach is also the simplest: when in doubt, say less. Because sometimes, the easiest way to stay within the law is knowing when not to speak at all.
Ancillary report funded by Coimisiún na Meán’s Courts Reporting Scheme