Limerick man fails in bid to overturn convictions for sexual abuse of partner’s daughter

A LIMERICK man has failed in his attempt to overturn multiple convictions for the sexual abuse of his partner’s daughter over a two-year period beginning when the girl was 12 years old.  

At the Court of Appeal this Monday, Ms Justice Tara Burns rejected the man’s argument that the trial judge was wrong to admit into evidence a statement by the victim’s mother in which the man admitted to the abuse.   

The 61-year-old, who cannot be named to protect the identity of his victim, was found guilty by a jury of all 31 counts against him involving sexual assault, oral rape, attempted rape and attempted anal rape of the girl at various locations in Limerick on dates between 1994 and 1997.

He had pleaded not guilty to the charges but was found guilty in November 2022, following a one-week trial in the Central Criminal Court, with the man subsequently jailed for 12 years by Mr Justice Paul McDermott in February 2023.   

The complainant in the case was aged between 12 and 14 at the time of the abuse, while the man was in his thirties.  

READ NEXT: BREAKING: Firefighters from three stations respond to blaze at Limerick chemical manufacturer

In launching an appeal against conviction, defence counsel Andrew Sexton SC said that after the jury was sworn in, there was a notice of additional evidence served, which was a statement from the complainant’s mother.

He said it was the defence’s position that an injustice would be done if the evidence of the mother was admitted but that the trial judge had ruled the evidence was admissible.  

Mr Sexton said that there was an alleged admission by the appellant in which he said: “I’m sorry for what I did to the kids.” Mr Sexton said that the reference to “kids” plural was ambiguous, making it more prejudicial than relevant.   

A further ground of appeal raised by the defence concerned the appellant being remanded in custody at one point during the trial and appearing in court the next day wearing different clothes than the shirt, tie and jacket he had been wearing every other day.

Mr Sexton said that this “dramatic change” took place, with the appellant sitting in front of the jury in a different mode of dress, which “led to eyebrows being raised by the jury”.  

In response to a question from Mr Justice Patrick McCarthy, presiding over the three-judge court, Mr Sexton accepted that he had no evidence to support the assertion that the jury had noted this change of dress. However, counsel said that “this was an injustice creeping into the case on top of other ones”, so the perception was one of unfairness to the appellant.  

Counsel for the Director of Public Prosecutions, Anne Rowland SC said the evidence in relation to the statement by the complainant’s mother arose following a conversation between the complainant and her mother, so it was the duty of the court to admit it unless the prejudicial value outweighed its probative value.   

Ms Rowland explained that an allegation that the appellant had sexually abused the girl had been put to him by the mother of the complainant, to which the appellant replied that it was lies. Three weeks later, the appellant called the woman and said he was sorry for what he did to her kids.  

READ NEXT: Mechanic jailed and disqualified for driving without insurance on busy Limerick road

Ms Rowland pointed out that the trial judge told the jury it was a matter for them to interpret whether this was an admission by the appellant.  

“This was compelling evidence. It was an admission by the accused, and it would have been unfair to the prosecution for it to be excluded,” said Ms Rowland.  

In delivering the court’s judgement, Ms Justice Burns said that the court was of the view that the words spoken by the appellant and the context in which they were delivered was most certainly a relevant statement that could be considered by the jury.  

She said that the fact that there was an explanation given to the jury as to how the mother became aware of the allegation did not make it prejudicial, adding that it was a matter for the jury to assess.  

Ms Justice Burns said that the court was rejecting this ground of appeal, as well as the subsequent ground of appeal relating to the issue of the clothes the appellant was wearing after being remanded in custody due his late attendance in court during the trial. She noted that the issue of bail being revoked was clearly a matter for the trial judge.  

In summary, the court rejected the appeal.  

During the trial in November 2022, the jury heard that the abuse started when the family moved to Limerick when the girl was aged 12. The man regularly sexually assaulted the girl, simulating sex on her in a garden shed when no-one else was around.     

The abuse progressed to oral rape when the girl was in bed at night. When her mother returned for a period to the UK for medical reasons, the girl was left in the care of the man for about six weeks and the abuse intensified, the court heard. During this period the man attempted to rape and anally rape her.  

The offending ended in early 1997 when the man approached the girl when she was in the bathroom and she told him she would shout out. She left home shortly afterwards and went to live with her father, the court heard.    

The complainant eventually confided in her mother about the abuse in 2007.