A Co Down man accused of trying to intimidate Jamie Bryson has been handed a restraining order barring him from harassing the prominent loyalist.
Martin Stewart was due to contest the two charges against him at Newtownards Magistrates Court on Tuesday but instead, the 57-year-old was handed a two year restraining order and the two charges against him withdrawn.
Stewart, from Faulkner Grange in Bangor, had faced one count relating to the improper use of a telecommunication network to send a “message or other matter that was if a menacing character” and attempted intimidation of Mr Bryson and a female in that using threats or menaces, he tried to force them to leave their respective residences or occupations, both alleged to have been committed on 10 April last year.
A prosecuting lawyer told District Judge Mark Hamill that given what he described as “the unique circumstances of this case,” Mr Bryson had taken the view that a restraining order was acceptable.
“That should be for two years and drafted in the usual way that Mr Stewart is not to annoy, harass or pester Mr Bryson, his former partner or his two children,” he told the court.
The order further states that Stewart is “forbidden to use or threaten violence” against the four named individuals “and must not instruct/encourage or, in any way, suggest that any other person should do so.”
Previous courts heard that despite the fact they had not been together for almost a decade, Bryson’s former partner was targeted due to a perceived association.
Imposing the order, Judge Hamill warned Stewart that breaching a restraining order carried a six month maximum prison sentence “which is a very live possibility if you come back in front of me.”
“Abide by the order, take cognisance of it and once it is signed, you can leave the building,” the judge told Stewart.
After the brief hearing, the loyalist activist said it was because of the particular background of the case that he “felt it appropriate to take a proportionate response and consent to the imposition of a restraining order without more being necessary.”
“There was no benefit to this individual being subjected to criminal convictions and potential imprisonment. He doesn’t pose a risk and I was happy to be able to take this opportunity to take an approach which demonstrated an act of goodwill and kindness.
“I hope the individual can go on to put this matter behind him and live a happy life going forward given his circumstances,” said Mr Bryson.
With more than a dozen people having faced similar charges over the years, he warned however that “this shouldn’t be taken as any kind of precedent.”
“This was a unique case with specific circumstances in respect of the defendant. As those who have issued threats to me have found out before, imprisonment is a very real possibility and it’s unlikely I’d consent to such a lenient and merciful approach in respect of anyone else.”