Former Irish international pool player tells court he was left ‘unrecognisable’ after alleged acid attack at house party

Ian Pickford recounted details of the alleged acid attack before the Limerick courts. Photo: Brendan Gleeson.

A FORMER Ireland international pool player, who was left disfigured following an alleged acid attack, told a court he was โ€œunrecognisableโ€ following the incident due to the extent of his injuries.

Ian Pickford (24), of Garryowen, Limerick, told the trial of his alleged attacker, John Cross, that he had no doubt it was the accused who threw an acid substance in his face.

Mr Pickford, a former Limerick intermediate pool champion who was also capped for Ireland at junior level, identified Mr Cross in court as the person who flung the โ€œcorrosive substanceโ€ at him.

Mr Cross (35), with an address at St Lawrenceโ€™s Park, Garryowen, denies one count of intentionally or recklessly causing serious harm to Mr Pickford during a house party at Mr Crossโ€™s home in the early hours of June 14, 2020.

Advertisement

Today (Tuesday), on the opening day of the trial at Limerick Circuit Criminal Court, Mr Pickford gave evidence of the impact of being burned by an acid substance.

โ€œI was unrecognisable at the time it happened. It was the worst I ever felt, I felt terrible and I didnโ€™t know why it happened,โ€ Mr Pickford told the court.

He said that following the attack he went to his parentsโ€™ home, located nearby, and his father rushed him to University Hospital Limerick.

Mr Pickford said he was transferred to the specialist burns unit at Cork University Hospital before being transferred to St Jamesโ€™s Hospital in Dublin, where he spent three months undergoing specialist treatment.

The jury of seven women and five men were shown photographs of extensive injuries to Mr Pickfordโ€™s head, face, and chest.

โ€œI had multiple skin grafts put on my face, which were taken from my left thigh and put across my forehead, my cheek, and my two eyelids,โ€ Mr Pickford explained.

Mr Pickford said he underwent four surgeries to try to heal the scarring on his upper body.

โ€œI had terrible pain after the procedures across my face, one of the skin grafts never took and I got a blood clot so they had to redo it,โ€ he said.

He added that he lost some sight in his left eye and he no longer plays pool competitively.

Mr Pickford, who said he had known Mr Cross for a number of years and lived close to his house, was asked by prosecution barrister John Oโ€™Sullivan to show the jury up close the extensive scarring.

Mr Pickford said that a few months before the alleged attack, he had been charged before the courts with having a โ€œvery small amount of cocaineโ€ which he said was โ€œfor a friendโ€.

Under cross examination, Mr Pickford agreed with Mr Crossโ€™ barrister, senior counsel Brian McInerney, that he had consumed at least eight cans of cider on the night prior to the alleged attack, but disagreed with Mr McInerney that he was โ€œdrunkโ€.

Mr Pickford accepted that results of blood tests taken at UHL on the night of the alleged attack showed he had 198 milligrams of alcohol per deciliter of blood.

Mr McInerney put it to Mr Pickford that the hospital had provided a chart which explained that 50-100mg/dL can result in โ€œflushing, slowing of reflexes, and impairmentโ€, and that over 100mg/dL could result in โ€œa depression of the central nervous system … and you had almost double this levelโ€.

Mr Pickford replied: โ€œI still know who done it to me, I seen who did it to meโ€.

Mr Pickford agreed with Mr McInerney that he had told Gardaรญ that a โ€œtall man with a husky voiceโ€ who he did not know had said to him immediately after the alleged incident โ€œthatโ€™s what you get for being a ratโ€.

He said he believed this was a comment โ€œreferring to the time I got caught with the cocaineโ€ but he did not know why he had been attacked.

Mr Pickford said the drugs case against him was โ€œstruck outโ€ by the courts after he was discharged from hospital.

Answering Mr McInerney, Mr Pickford said he took the phrase โ€œratโ€ to mean a person โ€œgiving information to the Gardaรญโ€, but there was no evidence Mr Pickford had given any information about anything.

He denied suggestions by Mr McInerney that he was trying to blame โ€œan entirely innocent manโ€ for the attack because he was afraid of identifying the actual culprit.

Mr McInerney told Mr Pickford: โ€œI take no pleasure in these questions, it (the attack) should not have happened, and it is to be condemned, but I put it to you that it was not John Cross, it was someone else that youโ€™re afraid of.โ€

Mr Pickford repeated that โ€œit was John Cross that did itโ€, and alleged that on the night Mr Cross threatened him not to tell anyone what had happened.

Mr Pickford agreed with Mr McInerney that he had initially told Gardaรญ that Mr Cross and another man had helped him out of Mr Crossโ€™ house after the alleged attack.

In his direct evidence in court, Mr Pickford said he had not immediately told his parents, hospital staff, nor Gardaรญ that Mr Cross was the alleged attacker โ€œout of fear of the consequences of what would happen to my family if I didโ€.

The trial continues.