Despite being previously refused bail for repeated child abduction then released by the High Court, within a matter of days, a 25-year-old man has been charged with committing the offence again.
Hugo Almeida, from Victoria Road in Dungannon, is accused of committing the original offences on October 11 and November 7, last year.
He was again charged with abducting the girl – who is in the care system – on January 13 as well as attempting to damage a PSNI vehicle.
Further reports were received of Almeida being in the child’s company over the last fortnight but no action was taken.
However, he was arrested in March 4 for abducting and assaulting the child, as well possessing cocaine.
Dungannon Magistrates’ Court previously heard Almeida was served with a warning notice against taking the child in June 2024, but by October social workers had concerns she was leaving their care to visit him in Dungannon.
As a result, when she took a bus, staff followed in a car and a short time later noted her in Almeida’s company.
Text messages between them were also discovered and police were informed.
Almeida was interviewed, replying ‘no comment’ to all questions.
He was charged with two counts of abduction.
But despite bail conditions, care staff became concerned the child was in his company again.
Police attended his address and observed a girl matching the description provided by care staff, however, she locked herself in the bathroom before absconding through a window.
By the time officers managed to force open the door she had fled but was found by social workers.
Objecting to bail on that occasion a police officer said: “The defendant obviously isn’t taking any notice of the court order banning him from being with this child. He is also failing to alert police if she goes to him. There are concerns of further breaches and offences being committed.”
District Judge Francis Rafferty refused bail, noting: “I cannot be satisfied there is anything that could be put in place to get the message through.”
Despite this, Almeida was later released by the High Court.
In relation to the latest arrest, a police officer opposed bail, explaining: “On this occasion there is no question as to whether the defendant was with (child). They were seen in the Railway Park area of Dungannon. In addition, he is alleged to have assaulted her this time.”
A defence barrister argued: “This isn’t typical child abduction and doesn’t actually seem to be abduction at all.”
Judge Rafferty remarked: “It does, because she’s a child. Are you suggesting abduction requires physical force? Does coercion count?”
The defence replied: “The court will be acutely aware that (child) is consistently traveling from an address about 12 miles away to be in the defendant’s company. It is accepted there is an order in place. He is at fault and an additional order was put in place that he is to contact police immediately if she contacts him, which he didn’t do in this instance. I accept this consistent, nuisance offending but the child doesn’t seem to be in danger.”
But Judge Rafferty queried: “Surely someone flying in the face of a court order can’t be classed as a nuisance?”
The defence argued while it may be more than that “it’s certainly not sinister”.
He added: “An alternative address with his parents is available for him to reside at if released.”
But the judge said: “I pass no comment on his parents’ ability to keep a handle on him when I see the details of this case, his record and these court appearances. Bail is refused.”
Almeida will appear again by video-link on April 2.
