The High Court prohibited the trial of J.A. on 15 indecent assault charges concerning alleged incidents at a Christian Brothers monastery, finding that the loss of the building and related evidence created a real risk of an unfair trial. It declined to prohibit two other charges, concerning alleged incidents in County C. and at a redacted Dublin address, which may proceed.
In a judgment delivered on 30 March 2007, Mr Justice John MacMenamin said the monastery charges covered dates between September 1984 and March 1986. The complainant alleged that incidents took place in one or two rooms at the monastery, including two described in some detail and 13 others supported by a brief, general account.
The court considered the defence claim that the monastery’s demolition, the death of the cook and other unavailable witnesses, and missing school attendance records had impaired J.A.’s ability to defend himself. It focused on the demolished premises, the absence of evidence about how the rooms were used, the cook’s potential relevance to two incidents involving food, and the limited detail distinguishing the 13 other charges.
The judge concluded that a jury could not fairly assess the setting and circumstances of the allegations on the evidence available, and that directions or warnings could not remedy the resulting prejudice. The court therefore granted judicial review by way of prohibition in relation to the 15 monastery charges.
The court reached a different conclusion on the charge concerning an alleged incident during a summer trip to County C. The complainant described an alleged assault behind a rock during a hill walk, placing it on the third day of a trip in August 1985. A witness recalled a 1985 trip and a birthday celebration but did not recall a hill walk. J.A. placed the trip in 1986 but said he could not independently verify the date. The judge held that the year discrepancy and the loss of the campsite owner as a possible witness did not establish actual prejudice to a core defence. The charge could proceed, with relevant matters addressed by the trial judge’s warnings.
The final charge concerned an alleged incident at Address “A” in Dublin between August 1987 and August 1989. The judge treated issues about J.A.’s recollection, the car described by the complainant and the availability of former house residents as matters for cross-examination or trial directions. Prohibition was declined on that charge too.
The court also found inordinate delay between the complaint in April 2002 and J.A.’s arrest for charge in June 2005, and expressed deep concern about it. But apart from the prejudice relating to the monastery charges, it found no additional prejudice sufficient to justify stopping the other charges. The court’s order did not determine guilt or innocence on any charge.