Defence counsel for three men accused of familial abuse have asked a Central Criminal Court jury to examine the reliability of the evidence against their clients.
Closing speeches in the trial of six men, aged between 32 and 55, concluded in the Central Criminal Court on Wednesday with the jury hearing from defence counsel on behalf of three of the defendants.
The six men face a combined total of 20 charges – 16 of which pertain to the main complainant, who is deaf. Three of the accused are uncles of the main complainant and three are younger brothers to her. The abuse is alleged to have occurred over a 19-year period between 1995 and 2014. None of the parties can be named for legal reasons.
Continuing his closing speech, John Peart SC, defending Accused F, submitted to the jury: “It’s nonsensical to think that a 13½-year-old boy would forcibly rape his 17½-year-old sister and she’d let him."
READ MORE
His client (32) has pleaded not guilty to two counts of raping the main complainant on dates between 2007 and 2009.
Peart noted the second incident of rape is alleged to have taken place around 12 months later, when his client was 14 and the woman 18.
He submitted that during his cross-examination of the woman, he asked her to clarify his client’s age and at one point she replied “it’s [Accused F’s name] fault”.
Peart said he repeated the question, with the woman replying “[Accused F’s name] learnt to rape me”.
He submitted the woman had refused to answer his question and instead gave him a “virtual black eye”.
Peart suggested there is “sparse information” about the alleged incidents. “Nonsensical is my respectful suggestion to you,” he said.
He said the “evidence isn’t all that intricate”, rather it is “full of holes”.
Peart asked the jury to consider the evidence his client was primarily living with other relatives and only stayed in the family home for a short period around the time the alleged incidents occurred. He noted there is evidence the woman was living with other relatives during this period.
He urged the jury to be wary of intuition and instinct and to rely instead on the evidence. Peart said the evidence is “chaotic” and “everything screams against it and the correct verdict is not guilty”.
Hugh Hartnett SC, for Accused B, told the jury evidence reliability is the key issue they must consider in their deliberations.
The 48-year-old uncle of the primary complainant is accused of three counts of rape and one count of anal rape on dates between 2006 and December 2014. He previously faced eight counts.
“We say in this case significant issues of lack of reliability arise”, Mr Hartnett said.
He noted the primary complainant did not make an allegation against his client when she first made a disclosure in 2017 and asked if this was due to shame or embarrassment.
“It is embarrassing to have sex with a close relative,” Hartnett said, notingsex did take place between his client and the woman.
“People tell lies about sexual matters out of shame and for various other reasons,” he said, acknowledging his client initially told lies to gardaí when interviewed.
“It was clear from the interview that he was deeply ashamed” of having sex with his niece, Hartnett said, noting it is not a crime.
“He was drunk. That is unpleasant but not a crime. So he told lies.”
Hartnett noted his client did eventually admit to having sex with his niece, but denied having anal sex.
“The important thing is what he said about the actual facts. He said she never said no, never pushed him away, she removed her own clothing and got into bed with him.”
Hartnett submitted the woman did not give any details about the alleged incidents and the accusations were “very bland”.
He asked jurors to consider if the evidence is reliable enough for them to be sure beyond a reasonable doubt. “I submit there can be only one answer to that question – a verdict of not guilty“.
Marc Thompson Grolimund SC, for Accused G, told jurors his client has remained steadfast in his denial of the allegation he raped his niece.
The 45-year-old uncle of the primary complainant denies a single count of rape on a date between 1995 and 1996.
Thompson Grolimund told jurors they must put aside any compassion or emotion and deal with the case coldly and dispassionately.
Ms Justice Caroline Biggs has begun her charge to the jury. The trial continues.
