The Court of Appeal has dismissed S.M.'s appeal against his conviction for rape, finding no unfairness or miscarriage of justice in evidence admitted at his trial.
S.M. was convicted on May 11, 2023 of one count of rape arising from events on June 13, 2019. The complainant, identified as BK, told the trial that she had gone with a friend to S.M.'s home, where the group drank alcohol. Her evidence was that she later awoke during sexual intercourse with S.M., called for her friend and subsequently said she had been raped.
The appeal focused on two pieces of evidence which S.M.'s new legal team sought permission to add as specific grounds of appeal.
The first concerned a speaker-phone call made shortly after the incident to BK's father, JK. He gave evidence that BK's friend SK said during the call: "I think she's been raped." S.M. argued this should not have been admitted.
The Court of Appeal held that the statement was relevant and admissible when viewed in the context of events immediately after the alleged offence. It said excluding it would have created an artificial account of why the call was made and what was happening in the apartment.
The second proposed ground challenged evidence that S.M. became aggressive when Gardaí told him they intended to seize his phone after his arrest. His defence had emphasised his calm and co-operative behaviour. The court ruled that once his demeanour had been put in issue, evidence that it later changed was relevant and admissible.
The court refused permission to add either new ground and rejected the original broadly worded appeal grounds. It said appeal grounds must be stated specifically and should not be drafted generically in the hope of expanding them after reviewing the transcript.
The appeal was dismissed, leaving the conviction in place. The judgment does not state the sentence imposed on S.M.