The Court of Appeal has allowed P.H.’s appeal and quashed convictions for rape, oral rape and three counts of sexual assault, finding that the combined effect of concerns in the case meant the convictions could not stand.
The judgment, delivered ex tempore on 28 July 2015, concerned convictions entered on 31 July 2013. The Court said the key issue was whether the trial judge should have withdrawn the case from the jury after all the evidence had been heard. The jury had received warnings about delay and corroboration, and convicted after lengthy deliberations.
The allegations concerned events in August 1993, when the complainant was nine and staying with family in County Kerry. The prosecution account placed alleged incidents during a week in Connemara. P.H. denied the charges through the defence case; he did not give evidence.
The appeal judgment described disputes about the locations and circumstances of the alleged incidents. Defence evidence challenged whether a car could have been parked beside a house in 1993, whether a house identified as the rape location had an upstairs room or was thatched, and whether the sleeping arrangements matched the complainant’s account. The complainant’s cousin, who was said to have been present for three incidents, recalled little of the week and gave evidence about sleeping arrangements that differed from the complainant’s account. The court also noted inconsistencies in the cousin’s earlier statements.
The court criticised the limited investigation into the houses and their occupants at the time of the allegations. It noted that potentially relevant witnesses, including P.H.’s mother and aunt and two men who had occupied a house identified as the rape location, had died before trial. The complainant had spoken to a social worker in 1997, but had little memory of that interview, making it difficult to cross-examine her about it. She made a statement to gardaí in 2005; P.H. was arrested in April 2007 and charged in October 2011.
The Court said no single concern would have justified withdrawing the case from the jury. Taken together, however, the age of the case, specific prejudice from the deaths of potential witnesses, inconsistencies between the complainant and her cousin, and issues relating to each count raised sufficient concern about the safety of the convictions. It therefore allowed the appeal and quashed them. The judgment did not order a retrial.