The Court of Appeal has dismissed G.C.’s appeal against five convictions for indecent assault, finding no basis to overturn the jury’s verdicts. The judgment addressed the conviction appeal only; it did not decide the Director of Public Prosecutions’ separate appeal against the sentences as unduly lenient.
G.C. was convicted by a jury at Naas Circuit Criminal Court on 17 December 2014 on five counts involving one complainant, identified as S.D. The jury acquitted him on five other counts that had gone to it. The original indictment contained 37 counts, but the trial judge withdrew 27 from the jury after the prosecution case. The remaining ten resulted in five convictions and five acquittals.
The convictions concerned alleged abuse at three locations in County Kildare during S.D.’s childhood and early teens. The Court of Appeal summarised her evidence as describing incidents at her grandfather’s home, her family’s first home and a later home. Those were allegations considered at trial, not new findings made by the appeal court.
G.C. challenged, among other matters, the indictment’s particulars, the prosecution’s opening remarks, evidence about disclosures to family members and professionals, and the decision to leave certain counts with the jury. The appeal court said the trial judge’s approach to particulars was “sub-optimal”, and that further particulars would have been preferable. It nevertheless found that the parties and jury understood the allegations on the counts that went to the jury and that the defence had not suffered unfairness.
The court also found that the prosecution’s failure to mention some evidence in its opening did not significantly prejudice the defence. It upheld the trial judge’s refusal to discharge the jury over the prosecution’s initial description of the case as “strong”, noting that the wording was corrected before evidence began. A witness’s brief account that S.D. had urged her not to stay overnight at the grandfather’s house was hearsay, the court said, but was not so prejudicial as to require the jury’s discharge; the trial judge gave directions on its use.
The appeal court concluded there was sufficient evidence for the counts that remained before the jury, including evidence the trial judge reviewed from a digital audio recording. It also upheld the admission of evidence from S.D.’s GP and counsellor about disclosures and her health, finding it relevant to the delay in making a formal report.
The court dismissed the conviction appeal. At trial, the five concurrent prison terms ranged from two to three years, with the final 12 months of the three-year terms suspended. The judgment records that the DPP’s sentence appeal was outside the scope of this decision.