The Court of Appeal has dismissed a man’s appeal against the sentence imposed after he pleaded guilty to eight counts of sexual assault involving his niece. The court said the net custodial term of three years did not represent an error of principle.
The offences occurred between 1994 and 1998, when the injured party was seven and the appellant was 25. The judgment said the assaults took place at the home of the injured party’s grandmother, who was also the appellant’s mother. A further 17 counts on the indictment were taken into account.
The appellant was convicted at Wicklow Circuit Criminal Court on 9 December 2016 and sentenced on 26 July 2017 to eight concurrent five-year prison terms. The final two years were suspended, subject to conditions for two years after release.
His appeal argued that the sentences were unduly harsh and that the sentencing judge had wrongly placed the offences at the highest level of gravity. The main focus at the appeal hearing was the gravity assessment and how rehabilitation had been considered.
The Court of Appeal said the sentencing judge had identified the systematic and exploitative nature of the offending and the appellant’s position of trust as aggravating factors. The judge had also recognised his guilty pleas, cooperation with gardaí, remorse, lack of previous convictions, low assessed risk of reoffending, work history, health problems and willingness to undergo further rehabilitation.
The appeal court said the five-year maximum for each offence was low given the range of conduct covered by the offence. It considered that the offending was at least around the 75 per cent mark on the gravity scale, placing an appropriate sentence at four years or more before mitigation. It said a five-year headline sentence was within the sentencing judge’s discretion.
The court focused on the net custodial term: three years after the suspended portion. It said this represented a discount of just under 50 per cent from the headline sentence and generously reflected the mitigating factors, including rehabilitation. The court also observed that rehabilitation likely to occur may have taken place during the 18 years between the last offence and prosecution.
The judgment recorded that the complainant described lasting effects on trust, confidence and fear of not being believed. The Court of Appeal concluded that the three-year net custodial sentence did not disclose an error of principle and dismissed the appeal.