The Court of Appeal has barred a rape trial over alleged events in 1970, finding that the delay and other circumstances created a real risk of an unfair trial and made it unjust to put the accused on trial.
The anonymised appellant, identified in the judgment as B.S., was charged with one count of rape allegedly committed on an unspecified date between January and May 1970. He was 16 at the time. The complainant, also anonymised, said she was seven and that the abuse happened on multiple occasions. The appellant denied raping or assaulting her.
The appeal concerned a High Court decision refusing to stop the prosecution. The Court of Appeal considered the case on the basis that a trial would take place 47 years after the alleged events. It noted that three men who the appellant believed could support his defence had died, as had both of the complainant’s parents. The complainant’s account and the appellant’s denial would be central to a case dependent on oral testimony, the judgment said.
The court also considered the appellant’s Garda interview in May 2014. According to the solicitor’s affidavit, he said he could not afford a solicitor after being advised to consult one, but the interview proceeded. The judgment said he appeared to have been deprived of a fair interview process.
The court held that the appellant had engaged with the evidence and that his belief the deceased witnesses could assist went beyond mere assertion. It found sufficient prejudice to create a real risk of an unfair trial, which could not be overcome by a delay warning. Separately, it found the circumstances wholly exceptional and concluded that proceeding would be unfair and unjust.
The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and granted an injunction restraining the Director of Public Prosecutions from proceeding further in the matter. The ruling stopped this prosecution; it was not a finding on whether the allegations were true.