Court hears Wicklow man accused of several sexual assaults grabbed woman by her throat

By Darragh McCann, The Wicklow People

A man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, has gone on trial at Wicklow Circuit Court in relation to multiple historic allegations of sexual assault. The accusations stem from separate complainants, with the alleged incidents taking place in County Wicklow during the 1990s.

Victim One in the case testified that, on the day in question, she was at the family home of her then-boyfriend, referred to as Witness A. The defendant was also present that day.

Victim One alleged that the defendant asked her to retrieve something. When she went to the man's house, she claimed he followed her inside and then attempted to sexually assault her.

Following the alleged incident, she said she returned to her own home. After composing herself, she went back to her boyfriend’s house and informed him of what had happened. She also gave evidence about the process of reporting the incident to gardaí, which she said took place approximately 18 months ago.

During examination by Jim Kelly, counsel for the prosecution, Victim One was questioned about her memory of the events and asked to help the court establish a clear timeline. She confirmed that she informed her then-boyfriend shortly after the alleged incident. She said he reacted with disbelief, as the accused was a close acquaintance of his.

Barry White SC, counsel for the defence, challenged Victim One’s account on several grounds. He questioned her about who was present at the house earlier that day, the specific dates involved, and the surrounding circumstances. He also noted inconsistencies between her garda statement and her court testimony, pointing out that certain details had emerged for the first time during the trial, details that closely aligned with her former partner’s account.

Mr White suggested that she had colluded with her ex-boyfriend (Witness A) to align their testimonies. Victim One denied this and said that her memory had improved over time, and she simply recalled more details while giving evidence in court.

The defence also questioned why she continued to babysit the defendant’s children after the alleged incident. Victim One did not deny this but did not elaborate further during that part of the testimony.

The first witness in the case was Victim One’s former boyfriend, referred to as Witness A. He testified that, on the day in question, he, his father, and his brother-in-law were in the back garden of the family home.

He told the court it was like any regular Saturday afternoon, with many people coming and going. He confirmed that Victim One and the defendant were also present. Although he did not specifically remember the two leaving the house together, he acknowledged that the household was busy, and such movements might have gone unnoticed.

He said that his girlfriend returned to the house a few hours later and told him about the alleged assault. He recalled being in shock and said he had to leave the house for about an hour to process what he had heard. He was 17 at the time, and Victim One was 16.

During examination Mr Kelly asked the witness to talk through what Victim A had told him at the time. He said that she said that the defendant tried to push her up against wall and kiss her and he then allegedly tried to force himself on her. He allegedly grabbed her by her throat and spread her legs, and she kicked him and ran back to her own home.

During cross-examination, Mr White questioned why neither he or the victim had gone to the gardaí at the time. Witness A replied that he had told his mother, stating: “She was an adult, and we were only teenagers.”

When asked why he hadn’t told Victim One’s brothers, he explained that they were afraid of the potential for retribution. Mr White asked: “Are they hard men?” To which Witness A replied: “No.”

The defence also highlighted inconsistencies in both Witness A’s and Victim One’s timelines, suggesting that the sequence of events described did not align and that both struggled to pinpoint the exact date of the alleged incident.

The trial is set to continue on Friday, October 10, when a second complainant is expected to take the stand.