The High Court has refused an application to prohibit the trial of a man charged with indecent assault alleged to have occurred between January 1987 and December 1988. The trial was scheduled for 5 June 2024, about 35 to 36 years after the alleged offence.
In a judgment delivered on 11 March 2024, Ms Justice Marguerite Bolger found no evidence of inordinate, culpable or unjust prosecutorial delay. The complainant made a statement to An Garda Síochána on 11 December 2017. The Director of Public Prosecutions directed a prosecution on 31 August 2021; the charge was brought on 15 September 2021, and the book of evidence was served on 16 November 2021.
The investigating Garda’s affidavit described inquiries into disclosures the complainant said he had made to different services, including obtaining records and taking statements from family members. A District Court order was obtained to secure records from one service. The COVID-19 pandemic intervened in March 2020. The completed investigation file went to the DPP in February 2021. Justice Bolger considered the records-gathering and, to a lesser extent, the pandemic, and found no blameworthy prosecutorial delay.
The applicant argued that the deaths of the complainant’s mother, father and uncle had prejudiced his defence because they could have exonerated him or assisted in challenging the evidence. The judge said the complainant’s sister would give evidence about possible arrangements in the family home and could be cross-examined. She found no prejudice that could not be better addressed by the trial judge.
The applicant also relied on severe stress and anxiety, depression and cardiac issues. A forensic psychologist’s report described worsening mental health after he learned of the allegations and assessed a risk of suicidality before or during trial. The judge preferred the account and conclusions of the applicant’s GP, based on records from his treating psychiatric team, which did not identify the complaint or prosecution as a cause or trigger. She found insufficient evidence that his medical difficulties, or any worsening, could safely be attributed to the time taken to bring the complaint to trial.
Justice Bolger said the trial could include breaks, shorter hearing days and a support person if needed. Taking those supports and the trial judge’s role into account, she concluded the case did not fall within the exceptional category where it would be unjust to proceed. She refused the application and listed the matter for mention before her at 10.30am on 11 April 2024 for final orders.