A former Garda sergeant facing 15 charges in connection with the alleged sexual abuse of the daughter of another garda applied to the High Court yesterday to stop the prosecution.
The offences set out in the charges are alleged to have been committed in the mid-1970s when the girl was aged between 10 and 14.
The alleged victim, now aged 33, claims she was indecently assaulted 40 to 50 times during that period in the defendant's home and garage.
In court yesterday Mr Hugh Hartnett, for the applicant, asked the court for an order, by way of judicial review, to prevent the trial proceeding on grounds of delay. Counsel said allegations were first made against his client in November 1996 and he was formally charged in September 1997.
Mr Hartnett said his client, in an affidavit, had stated that because of the passage of time between the alleged abuses and his charging, he was not in a position to instruct legal advisers.
The application was opposed by counsel for the prosecution, who submitted that there was no time bar for the prosecution of the plaintiff on the charges.
Dr Elaine Fitzgerald, a psychologist, said that although the victim was not psychologically disabled, she was emotionally and developmentally delayed. She had put her distress on hold and had not dealt with it over the years by way of a formal legal complaint.
In 1988 she had informed her mother, but no legal or psychological action was taken.
Cross-examined by Mr Hartnett, Dr Fitzgerald agreed she had not conducted any psychological tests on the woman because she felt no need to do so. She agreed the alleged sex molestation was not the only reason for the victim's subsequent psychological state. There were other difficulties, such as her mother's propensity to alcohol.
The alleged victim had difficulty attaching to her mother and had described her father as a very strict man. It was conceivable that an incorrect or false memory of what occurred as a child could occur but she did not believe that was the position.
Mr Aindreas O Caoimh SC, for the DPP, said the only evidence tendered was that advanced by the State, and the court had a duty to act on that. No countervailing evidence had been presented. He argued that the alleged victim had been psychologically disabled and prevented from telling her story to the authorities up to the time she spoke to a counsellor.
The president of the High Court, Mr Justice Morris, reserved judgment.