Mr Mulligan was arrested for voyeurism the following day and interviewed, making full admissions.
Objecting to bail the officer said this was largely about “protecting the defendant”.
“He and his family are worried about repercussions or being attacked.”
She said the video had been “shared hundreds of times on social media and has received strong public opposition”.
“The defendant is well known and readily identified. Police have classed this as a critical incident.”
The officer accepted there were no previous convictions for any offending however, added, “police feel he is at risk if released to his home address given the interest on social media”.
The defence lawyer said that when Mulligan was arrested “concerns were immediately raised around his “limited capacity and he was interviewed in the presence of an appropriate adult”.
“He has made certain admissions, but it is not an automatic assumption that he would receive a custodial sentence.”
He said police were not pointing to risks of further offending or witness interference, rather bail was opposed out of fears for Mulligan’s personal safety.
“It’s bizarre that police cannot protect this man or put a safety plan in place and instead deprive him of liberty because of their inability to manage the situation,” said the defence lawyer.