The Court of Appeal has upheld concurrent eight-year prison sentences imposed on Damien Reilly for rape offences committed against a younger neighbour over several years.
Reilly pleaded guilty at the Central Criminal Court to five counts of rape and three counts of sexual assault. The offences occurred between May 1994 and January 2000, when Reilly was aged between 17 and 22. The complainant was eight years younger.
The abuse continued over a prolonged period and included repeated rape and sexual assault. The sentencing court treated the complainant’s young age, the age difference and Reilly’s position of trust within two closely connected families as important aggravating factors.
The complainant disclosed the abuse after returning to Reilly’s home town in 2014. The judgment records that an encounter with Reilly in a pub caused him distress and prompted him to tell his family and make a Garda complaint.
When interviewed in 2015, Reilly initially denied the most serious allegations but admitted some sexual activity. He later pleaded guilty.
The sentencing court also heard substantial mitigation. Reilly had no previous convictions and had suffered a serious brain injury at the age of seven which continued to affect him. A detailed psychological report was obtained before sentence.
The trial judge selected a 12-year headline sentence before mitigation and reduced it to eight years. Reilly argued on appeal that the four-year reduction effectively reflected only his guilty plea and failed to give proper weight to his other personal circumstances.
The Court of Appeal rejected that interpretation. It held that the judge’s reference to the “totality of the factors” showed that all relevant mitigation had been considered, although the early guilty plea was the principal factor.
The court described both the 12-year starting point and eight-year final term as being at the outer limit of what was appropriate, but still within the sentencing judge’s discretion. The appeal was dismissed.