The High Court has refused an application to stop the prosecution of an 80-year-old man facing 358 charges of indecent assault, finding that his complaints about delay and missing evidence did not justify prohibiting a trial before it began.
The judgment, delivered by Mr Justice Mark Heslin on 3 August 2021, concerns allegations by four of the man’s nephews. The alleged offences span 1 May 1967 to 14 August 1984. The applicant denied the allegations and said he intended to plead not guilty.
He argued that the passage of time had left him unable to secure a fair trial. Among other concerns, he cited the deaths of his parents and other potential witnesses, unavailable employment records, his health, and alleged inconsistencies in the complaints. He sought an order prohibiting further prosecution, or alternatively a stay.
The judge said the evidence did not establish that missing witnesses or documents had deprived the applicant of a realistic opportunity to pursue an obviously useful line of defence. He found no evidence that the applicant’s physical conditions would prevent him from defending the charges, and accepted a forensic psychiatrist’s assessment that he had no cognitive decline.
The court also found no inordinate or inexcusable delay by the authorities after the allegations came to Gardaí in 2016 and 2017. It said the investigation involved multiple complainants and police forces in two jurisdictions, and that substantial investigative work took place before the applicant was charged in November 2019. The judge said the reasons complainants delayed making formal reports were not the central issue; the question was whether the delay caused prejudice making a fair trial impossible or creating a real risk of one.
Relying on Supreme Court guidance, the judge said a trial court is generally better placed to assess fairness in light of the prosecution evidence as it actually emerges. He concluded this was not one of the rare, exceptional cases warranting intervention by the High Court in advance. The decision did not determine the truth of the allegations or the applicant’s guilt or innocence.
The relief sought was refused. The judge directed the parties to correspond about the form of order, including costs; if they could not agree, short written submissions were to be filed within 14 days.