The Court of Appeal has dismissed J. K.’s appeals against his convictions for 16 counts of indecent assault and the six-year prison sentence imposed for those offences. It found the trial satisfactory, the convictions safe and no error of principle in sentencing.
The offences occurred between 1976 and 1979, when the complainant was aged between six and 10. J. K. worked first as a kitchen porter and assistant, then as a chef, at a hotel owned by the complainant’s family beside their home. The court said the abuse took place in several locations, including the hotel and its grounds, church grounds and a local school. The complainant’s evidence described a progression from sexual touching and being made to perform oral sex to buggery, alongside threats intended to stop him disclosing the abuse.
A jury unanimously convicted J. K. on all 16 counts after a trial in December 2013. In February 2014, the Circuit Criminal Court imposed two years on each count. The terms for counts 1 to 14 ran concurrently, while the terms for counts 15 and 16 ran consecutively, producing a total of six years.
On appeal, J. K. argued that the verdicts were unsafe and against the weight of the evidence, and that the trial judge had misdirected the jury about the presumption of innocence. The Court of Appeal rejected both arguments. It said the complainant had given clear, detailed evidence and withstood cross-examination; it noted that the only contradictory evidence was J. K.’s denials when interviewed by gardaí. The court also held that the jury had been properly told that J. K. did not have to prove his innocence and that the prosecution had to prove guilt. It dismissed the conviction appeal.
J. K. also challenged the sentence, arguing that the sentencing judge had not sufficiently allowed for his lack of previous convictions and had not suspended part of the term to encourage rehabilitation. The appeal court agreed with the prosecution that the offending was at the highest end of seriousness, citing its nature, grooming, breach of trust and threats. It said the prolonged abuse did not warrant a significant reduction for good character and found no basis to suspend the sentence, given the absence of remorse, acceptance of wrongdoing or evidence of willingness to engage in rehabilitation. The sentence appeal was dismissed.
The decision was delivered ex tempore on 27 July 2015 by Mr Justice Edwards, with Mr Justice Sheehan and Mr Justice Mahon also listed on the court heading.