The Supreme Court has granted an order prohibiting the trial of a man, now aged in his late 70s, who is alleged to have committed sexual offences in the late 1950s and early 1960s against two complainants, then young girls.
In allowing an appeal against a High Court decision refusing to stop his prosecution regarding the two complainants, the Supreme Court held yesterday there had been gross delay (until early 1999) in the making of complaints to the Garda, which had not been sufficiently explained.
The man had previously secured an order in the High Court prohibiting his prosecution on 36 charges alleging indecent assault of another girl between January 1955 and December 1963.
In the Supreme Court, Mr Justice Brian McCracken said the case was one of a number in recent years in which a person accused of sexual offences against children had sought to prohibit their trial on grounds of delay between the alleged commission of the offences and trial.
It was acknowledged by counsel for both parties that the period involved in this case was probably the greatest delay to date that had come before the courts in such proceedings, the judge said. The man faced 61 charges of indecent assault against three girls who were his neighbours.
Apart from the charges relating to the first girl in which the High Court had made an order of prohibition, there were also 34 charges alleging indecent assault of her sister from 1958 to 1963 and a single charge of indecent assault of a first cousin of the other complainants in 1962.
The two sisters and their cousin made written complaints to gardaí in February and March 1999. Thus, Mr Justice McCracken said, the first complaint was made more than 35 years after the last alleged offence.
Although the charges in relation to the first sister had been prohibited, her position was central to the case in relation to the other complainants. The first sister, having been abroad for a period, returned to the area and purchased a property adjoining the man's. A dispute arose between them which escalated into an assault by him on her. She complained to gardaí and District Court proceedings were issued in February 1999. He was convicted of assault and fined £500 and she was required to enter into a bond to keep the peace for three years.
Mr Justice McCracken said this dispute was the trigger for the complaints made in relation to the allegations of indecent assault many years earlier. The first time the man became aware of the charges against him was in May 1999 when contacted by gardaí.
On June 2nd, 1999, he formally denied all involvement.
The judge said neither the complainants' evidence, nor matters set out in a report of a psychologist/psychotherapist, came anywhere near justifying the gross delay in the present case.
It had to be shown that there was some very good reason, normally psychological, which made them incapable of complaining.
In his view, the greater the delay in making a complaint, the greater the need for an adequate explanation for that delay.
He was satisfied no sufficient explanation had been given.