The Supreme Court has refused to stop the prosecution of an anonymised Christian Brother on eight charges arising from alleged sexual abuse at an industrial school in Tralee more than 30 years earlier.
D.D., then aged 63, faced four counts of indecent assault and four corresponding counts of procuring the complainant to commit acts of gross indecency. The allegations concerned four incidents said to have occurred when the complainant was a boy living at the school. D.D. denied any sexual abuse and said he had no recollection of the complainant.
The High Court had already refused an injunction preventing the trial. D.D. appealed, arguing that the prolonged delay in reporting the allegations was inadequately explained and that the passage of time had impaired his ability to defend himself.
Mr Justice Geoghegan, delivering the Supreme Court judgment, upheld the High Court’s assessment of the delay. The complainant said he had been functionally illiterate, had feared authority figures and gardaí, and had felt unable to make allegations against a Christian Brother. A psychologist gave evidence supporting the existence of those inhibitions. The complainant said a televised apology by the Christian Brothers eventually prompted him to come forward.
The court also rejected the claimed prejudice to the defence. D.D. pointed to the deaths or unavailability of people associated with the school, its demolition in 1992 and uncertainty about details such as dormitory supervision. The court found no concrete lost evidence of significant assistance to the defence.
Geoghegan J said the fact that the case might ultimately depend heavily on the complainant’s word against the accused’s denial was not, by itself, a reason to prohibit a criminal trial.
The judgment stressed that long pre-complaint delay remains legally relevant, but its consequences depend on the circumstances, including whether the alleged offences themselves contributed to the complainant’s inability to report them and whether the accused can demonstrate prejudice.
The appeal was dismissed, leaving the prosecution free to proceed. The Supreme Court made no finding on whether the allegations were true.