A self-proclaimed ‘supreme being’ has been found guilty of criminal damage following a contested hearing in which he represented himself.
Paul Kevin Canavan (41) from Millrace Avenue, Dungannon, denied damaging an electricity meter on 17 August 2022, and insisted as a ‘supreme being’ he did not consent to the charge.
This also led to him refusing to enter the dock or be addressed by his surname, contending to be “Paul Kevin making a special appearance”.
Following numerous and often dramatic stand-offs at Dungannon Magistrates’ Court, significantly delaying the matters and sometimes seeing Canavan held in custody for contempt, District Judge Michael Ranaghan issued a ruling around the, “plethora of nonsense that common men, sovereign men or indeed supreme beings” used as a defence and warned it wouldn’t be tolerated further.
In a contested hearing lasting over three hours, Canavan asked NIE staff the same questions while repeatedly stating damage wasn’t caused therefore he couldn’t possibly be guilty.
He also accused NIE of trespassing on his property when they assessed the meter, ignoring warning signs to stay out.
Initially Canavan sought to have his friend assist him in the case but when the person was asked multiple times to provide his identity and persistently gave only his first name, Judge Ranaghan refused to allow this.
Despite being told numerous times the decision to remove or interfere with the matter as NIE property constituted criminal damage, Canavan flatly refused to accept this.
He demanded witnesses provide him with the legislation showing he could not have “a competent electrical engineer” remove or install a meter, and rejected that the person in question must be authorised as an NIE engineer.
In the course of the hearing Judge Ranaghan noted one of Canavan’s supporters was taking notes.
Asked if he had applied for the court’s permission the person said he was doing this to assist Canavan.
When asked again the man said it was his human right to take notes and resolutely refused to say anything else.
Ordering him out Judge Ranaghan warned, “This court is not going to be used as a circus.”
Canavan insisted the removed device was a Smart Meter which he claimed were very dangerous, but no matter how many times he was told it was not a Smart Meter, he asserted: “That has never been proved.”
Even when told NIE don’t install Smart Meters, Canavan refused to accept this.
He confirmed he paid “a competent electrician” £50 to remove the meter but could not say who this was, only that he’d found a number in the phonebook.
Afterwards the electrician posted “No Trespassing” signs about the meter housing, having been left for him to do so by Canavan.
Asked if he made the signs, Canavan said, “No – I printed them out and left them for the electrician to put up.”
He accepted he didn’t contact NIE before embarking on this move and had no authorisation to tamper with the device, pointing out: “It was never my intention to do anything like that.”
In summing up Canavan claimed, “They (NIE) admitted in court no criminal damage was ever done. I proved this beyond reasonable doubt. The meter was not left useless. It could still have been used in other premises.
“The prosecutor admitted I was not present so I couldn’t have done it. If a competent electrician removed it how can I be charged with criminal damage when there was no criminal damage. There was no injured party or individual hurt. No material evidence has been proved in this court. There was no criminal damage and that was admitted by them (NIE).”
After consideration, Judge Ranaghan said, “There is clearly misunderstanding by the defendant around the charge wording. That is ludicrous and is no doubt influenced by the nonsense many ascribe to and available online. It doesn’t assist defendants. It’s a smokescreen and reliance on it is a fallacy.
“I repeatedly urged the defendant to seek proper legal advice given the serious nature of the charge, but he declined to do so. He is perfectly entitled to self-represent but is obliged to at least acquaint himself with the relevant law.”
The judge continued: “He states the meter was not damaged therefore he cannot be guilty of criminal damage. The defendant appears to have ignored the legal precedent he was guided to on the actual meaning of criminal damage.
“From the moment the meter was removed by the ‘competent electrician’ it wasn’t functioning and was therefore damaged within the meaning of criminal damage. I don’t believe the defendant cannot remember who this ‘competent electrician’ was. That’s stretching the bounds of credibility.”
Canavan was convicted of the charge and fined £500 along with £332 compensation for NIE.
Most read today
Operator’s Licence Notice
