The Florencecourt summer house which was burnt down.
A 15-year-old boy has been convicted for his involvement in destroying the summerhouse at Florencecourt. The popular tourist spot, situated on the grounds of the National Trust was destroyed by fire on August 14, 2014.
At a youth court sitting at Enniskillen Magistrates Court the young male was sentenced to 24 hours of reparation work with the National Trust and placed under the supervision of the Youth Justice Agency for the next 12 months. He was further told to engage with a drug and alcohol agency as part of the sentence.
The prosecutor explained that on August 14, 2014 a witness saw four males leaving Florencecourt and travelling towards Enniskillen after the incident of arson. All four were then interviewed by police and said they were at the scene, but denied lighting the house on fire. The court heard that National Trust Property Manager at Florencecourt, Jim Chestnutt valued the damage at to the house at £30,000. Since the incident work to rebuild the summer house has begun with the walls completed, but the roof yet to be finished.
Defence barrister Gavyn Cairns said that the youth was just 14 at the time of the incident, the youngest of the four charged with this offence and the first to admit his guilt. The defence told the court that the defendant was not the protagonist and noted that peer pressure may have played a part in addition to alcohol.
Mr Cairns described the incident as a “tragic occurrence”, stating it was a “building of some antiquity, sentiment to the local community in Fermanagh.” He said that the defendant “clearly had academic talent”, but as a consequence of “many difficulties” had become a looked after child. Mr Cairns said the company his client had been keeping at the time of the offence had “been doing him no good”, but he had then moved away, before returning to the area recently.
“I hope he doesn’t fall back into the same pattern,” noted district judge Nigel Broderick and stressed his wish that the defendant not resume those negative relationships again. The judge recognised this was a serious offence which had caused much concern in the local community. “This was both an historical and valuable building for a number of reasons. Whilst it can be physically replaced it will not have the same identity as the one before.”
The judge said that while one might expect the courts to take a “robust approach” to this offending he noted the defendant’s personal circumstances, age, his lack of previous relevant convictions and that this was a “joint enterprise”. The fact that the defendant was not the person who set light to the building was also taken into account before sentencing.
To read more.. Subscribe to current edition
Receive quality journalism wherever you are, on any device. Keep up to date from the comfort of your own home with a digital subscription.
Any time | Any place | Anywhere