Sheep’s Head man with asthma bit his neighbor in row over vegetation fire

A MAN from Kilcrohane on the Sheep’s Head peninsula, who bit his neighbour in a row over the burning of vegetation, has been given the benefit of the Probation Act on the condition that he is to be of good behaviour for a year.

Liam Zinkant (57) of 2, Pairc na Habhann, Ardahill, Kilcrohane, was charged with assaulting Ian Sanford at Ardahill on September 3rd 2022.

In evidence, Ian Sanford, a local publican, said he had secured a permit from the local authority to burn the vegetation arising from the felling of 42 trees on his land.

He said he had also consulted with the local fire department and had agreed to stay with the fire until it was completely out. The witness said there was quite a pile and he started the fire at 3pm, expecting it to be out by about 10pm. About an hour later, he said he heard Liam Zinkant shouting at him: ‘I can’t believe you put a match to that f***ing fire. Come over here and I will knock your f***ing head off.’ The accused, who has asthma, was allegedly threatening in his behaviour and asked: ‘How do you expect me to breathe?’ In reply, the witness said he told Liam Zinkant to close his windows.

Shortly after, he said the accused came into the field and ‘ran at him with his arms swinging’. Ian Sanford said Liam Zinkant hit him in the glasses at the side of his head. In response, he said he defended himself by pulling the accused closer to him, in a kind of ‘bear hug’, and they fell to the ground.

It was at that stage the witness said Liam Zinkant bit him on the shoulder. Ian Sanford said he got on top of the accused and told him to ‘calm the f**k down’.

Colette McCarthy, solicitor defending, put it to the witness that her client has a fused coccyx and walks with a stick and could not have run at him, as he alleged. She submitted that Ian Sanford was inconsistent in his evidence in terms of the time, the type of assault, and whether or not he knew her client had a disability.

The solicitor said Ian Sanford had given a statement to retired Gda John Dowling claiming he had received a punch to the jaw. She also put it to him that it was he who knocked her client to the ground. ‘I got punched in the face,’ replied the witness, who also produced photographs, one of which showed a bite mark to his shoulder.

Differing evidence in terms of wind direction, and the billowing of smoke, was also given, and two sets of CCTV footage were viewed by the judge.

Retired Gda John Dowling investigated the complaint made by Ian Sanford. Ms McCarthy asked the garda if he had recommended that Ian Sanford be prosecuted as well as her client. Gda Dowling said he had not. Ms McCarthy submitted that Ian Sanford had been inconsistent in his evidence but Judge James McNulty declined to give her a direction in the case.

‘Liam Zinkant has a case to answer,’ the judge said before the trial resumed with the accused giving evidence in his own defence.

The 57-year-old told the court he is on a disability pension. On the date of the alleged offence, he said he called out to Ian Sanford from 20m away.

‘I said it would have been a common courtesy to let us know,’ said the accused, who complained that the smoke from the fire was all around his house, and that it had engulfed the village of Kilcrohane.

He said Ian Sanford asked him to come to him and he walked towards the fire. ‘He told me to f**k off. That is when it happened, he threw me to the ground,’ said the accused. ‘I landed on my back and couldn’t move. ‘Tina (his wife) came into the field and shouted at him three times to get off me.’

‘I am an easy victim. Once I fall, I am like a turtle, I can’t get back up again,’ said Mr Zinkant, who also told the court he required pain medication and two months counselling after the incident.

In cross examination by Insp Anthony Harrington, the accused admitted going into the field to remonstrate with Ian Sanford was ‘a poor decision’. He denied he was angry, claiming instead that he was ‘annoyed’ and he denied punching or biting Ian Sanford. 

In evidence, Tina Zinkant corroborated the evidence given by her husband. She agreed with his assessment saying he was ‘annoyed but he wasn’t angry’.

Judge McNulty said he is ‘no Judge Fudge’ and that his approach to dealing with cases, where there is a conflict in the evidence, is to evaluate the evidence on their strength and the credibility of the witnesses. While he described Ian Sanford’s evidence as ‘rambling’, he nevertheless deemed it credible.

He held that the accused was ‘sufficiently angered to walk his way swiftly to where Ian Sanford was burning trees’. ‘He acknowledges that he made a mistake,’ the judge added. ‘He did say he went down with a purpose to let this man know what he thought of him.’

The judge said it was unlikely that Ian Sanford would push a man with a disability even though the accused had ‘gone down at some pace’ to upbraid him. ‘Ian Sanford was left with a mark on his upper arm. He hardly bit himself,’ said the judge.

‘It is also significant that Ian Sanford reported the matter. I am satisfied that Liam Zinkant initiated the physicals and initiated the assault,’ the judge concluded.

The defendant was given the benefit of the Probation Act on the condition that he is to be of good behaviour for a year.