A former primary teacher has secured a High Court order restraining the DPP from proceeding with his prosecution on a charge of sexually assaulting a 12-year-old schoolgirl in 1982.
Ms Justice Mary Finlay Geoghegan in a reserved judgment held that of the 16-year-delay in the girl making her complaint, between seven and 10 years could not be excused by either the effects of the alleged assault or the fact the accused was the girl's teacher. No formal complaint was made until 1998.
The judge decided the teacher had discharged the onus of proof of establishing that as a matter of probability, there was a serious risk "of an unfair trial or at a minimum, presumptive prejudice".
She also noted that the teacher was charged with one count of sexual assault on the girl, alleged to have occurred in May/June 1982.
The teacher had been returned for trial in 1998 in respect of this particular charge and of charges of sexual assault against four others; that trial was adjourned due to the publicity.
He was then tried in relation to the first of the four other complainants and acquitted. He was convicted in relation to a second complainant; at the start of his trial in relation to a third complainant he successfully applied, on grounds of delay, to quash the indictment.
At the trial of a fourth complainant, he was acquitted of rape and convicted of sexual assault.
Ms Justice Finlay Geoghegan said the girl first made a formal complaint in June 1998. At the date of the alleged incident she was 12. When 15 years old in 1985, her mother had approached her having heard gossip of alleged abuse by the teacher. The girl disclosed the alleged incident.
Her father, when told, made comments which the girl perceived to be disbelieving or minimising what occurred.
Having considered all the evidence, she was not satisfied that the entire delay until 1998 was attributable until then to the effects on the girl of the alleged incident or any relationship with the teacher.
The delay until 1985, when the girl told her mother, was explicable, the judge said. However, she was 18 years old in 1987 and there was a further 10-year delay. For seven of those years, the girl was in what she herself described as a "supportive relationship" of her own.
Accordingly, she concluded that as a matter of probability, there was a period of delay of about seven to 10 years in the making of the complaint which was not excusable.
Having regard to the nature of the offence - a single incident, alleged to have taken place in private but in a particular context, that by reason of the significant lapse of time, the teacher was prejudiced in his ability to defend the charge.