The Court of Appeal dismissed F.C.’s appeal against his conviction on six counts of sexual assault, ruling that his trial was fair and that the complainant had been comprehensively cross-examined.
A Central Criminal Court jury convicted F.C. on 15 January 2016 after a five-day trial. He was sentenced to five years in prison, with the final 15 months suspended subject to conditions. The offences were alleged to have taken place between May and September 2012. F.C. denied them.
The complainant, identified in the judgment as W.H., was 14 at the time of the alleged offences and 17 when she testified. She gave evidence by live video link without objection. The judgment says the alleged incidents occurred at her grandfather’s house on Sundays when family members were at a market in Lifford, Co. Donegal.
During cross-examination, W.H. became distressed and asked for a break. She was initially unwilling to continue, but agreed to return after speaking privately with prosecution counsel, with the trial judge’s agreement and defence counsel’s consent. Her evidence then concluded. Defence counsel argued that her repeated inability to recall details meant F.C. had not had a fair opportunity to confront his accuser. The defence sought to have the jury discharged and later asked the judge to direct an acquittal.
The trial judge refused both applications, finding that the differences between W.H.’s evidence in chief and her cross-examination could be considered by the jury and did not make the trial unfair. The judge gave a corroboration warning, drawing the jury’s attention to the contrast in her answers and leaving the assessment of her evidence to them.
The Court of Appeal reviewed the recording of W.H.’s evidence. It noted her hesitancy and distress during the lengthy cross-examination, as well as her difficulty recalling some details from statements made more than three years earlier. The court said her memory of the sexual acts alleged and the surrounding circumstances remained clear, and considered the difficulties with other details consistent with the passage of time and the stress of giving evidence about alleged abuse.
The appeal court concluded that W.H. had made herself available for cross-examination and had been questioned comprehensively. It held that her memory and credibility were matters for the jury, which could take any weaknesses in her answers into account. The court found the trial fair and dismissed the appeal. The judgment does not alter the convictions or sentence.