The Court of Appeal has upheld D.M.’s convictions on three counts of sexual assault involving his partner’s teenage daughter at their family home in Limerick.
D.M. was convicted by a jury at Limerick Circuit Court on 6 February 2014. He had originally faced 20 counts of sexual assault covering the period from May 2008 to December 2009. The jury acquitted him on 17 counts and convicted him on three, relating to May 2008, September 2008 and May 2009.
He received concurrent three-year prison sentences with the final 12 months suspended for five years. He was also directed to comply with the Probation Service and was placed on the sex offenders register for ten years.
The appeal focused on two incidents during the trial rather than the underlying allegations themselves.
First, the complainant referred to a late-night meeting in a pub where her mother asked in the presence of D.M.’s brother whether D.M. touched her. She also said the brother wanted to call the Gardaí. The defence argued that this was inadmissible hearsay against D.M. and that the jury should have been discharged or given a specific warning not to use it against him.
The Court of Appeal accepted that the brother’s alleged remark was inadmissible and potentially prejudicial to D.M. However, it found that such problems commonly arise in jury trials and can be managed without abandoning the entire trial. The defence had addressed the point in its closing speech and had not asked the judge for a specific further direction.
The second issue arose when jurors asked why they had not heard evidence from health-service personnel and a school counsellor. The trial judge explained the hearsay rule and told them they could consider only evidence actually admitted at trial.
The appeal court said it might have been preferable to hear submissions outside the jury’s presence first, but no injustice resulted. It rejected arguments that the mixed verdicts showed improper speculation and dismissed the appeal.