An Army Ranger corporal who grabbed the heads of two females, exposed himself and called one of the women a “dog’s bollocks” while socialising in an hotel has lost his challenge to his demotion to private.
Private Damien McDonagh (27), a medal-winning Army Ranger attached to the Second Infantry Battalion at Cathal Brugha Barracks, Dublin, had appealed to the three judge Courts-Martial Appeal Court against a court-martial ruling of June 2009 reducing him to the rank of private.
The three judge Court Martial Appeals Court today rejected arguments by Pte McDonagh that the demotion was disproportionate as it would lead to a €6,500 loss in salary per year. The military judge’s decision was “impeccable”, having practically and realistically weighed all relevant factors, it said.
It also endorsed the military judge’s remarks to Pte McDonagh that he is a young man whose future is “entirely in your own hands”. It was clear, by the time his current contract expires, he might have sufficiently rehabilitated himself to regain the trust of his superiors enabling his retention in the army and possible promotion to his previous rank, it noted.
The demotion arose as a result of incidents at the Best Western Boyne Valley Hotel and Country Club, Drogheda, Co Louth, on St Patrick’s Day 2007 where he was attending a function to celebrate the passing out of recruit platoons to which he had been an instructor.
Pte McDonagh ultimately pleaded guilty in June 2009 to charges arising out of those incidents. He admitted he had assaulted a civilian woman at the hotel by putting his hands around her head and pulling it towards him.
He also admitted charges of conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline contrary to the Defence Act, including grabbing a female private by her head and pulling it towards him and exposing himself in front of the women. He admitted he used inappropriate language towards the civilian woman and, at the same venue, becoming involved in an affray with another soldier.
Pte McDonagh was fined €500 and demoted but appealed only against the demotion to the Court Martial Appeal Court comprising Mr Justice Liam McKechnie, presiding and sitting with Mr Justice Brian McGovern and Ms Justice Maureen Clark.
In its judgment, the appeal court noted Pte McDonagh told the military judge he had consumed great quantities of alcohol from 2pm that day, was drunk and unable to recall when the function ended. He had unreservedly apologised for conduct he freely acknowledged as unacceptable and described it as entirely out of character. He voluntarily declared he had let himself, his unit and the Defence Forces down, was remorseful and wanted to stay in the Army.
The court also noted Pte McDonagh had enlisted in late 2002, had several military qualifications and was the meritorious recipient of a number of medals. He had served in Liberia and Kosovo and character evidence was given on his behalf by a lieutenant and company sergeant who, while expressing surprise and shock at what had occurred, spoke highly of him as a soldier. He had no previous convictions either as a civilian or with regard to his military career.
The appeal court said the maintenance of good order and discipline is a key element in army life and all the charges were grounded upon conduct described as being prejudicial to good order and discipline of the force.
The sole ground of appeal was essentially the financial consequences resulting from the demotion and there could be no complaint about how the military judge carefully approached the task of sentencing, it said.
The court acknowledged the strong supporting evidence of Pte McDonagh’s good character and also recognised his conduct on the night in question may have been once off offending behaviour fuelled by excessive alcohol.
However, the court could see no other way of achieving the objective of good order and discipline in army life except by upholding the demotion. There was no error of principle in the military judge’s decision. The financial effects of demotion, and the fact the embargo on promotion in the army could also affect him adversely, were consequential and not intended as a focal point of punishment.
The female private involved was a person over whom Pte McDonagh had command and responsibility while the civilian was her guest at the function, it also noted.
