The Court of Appeal has dismissed Eamon Maughan’s appeal against an effective five-year prison sentence for offences including assaulting his wife, threatening to kill her and intimidating her to frustrate his prosecution.
The judgment, delivered by Mr Justice Mahon on 21 April 2016, concerned sentences imposed at Castlebar Circuit Criminal Court on 4 April 2014, after a jury convicted Maughan on 2 February 2014. The appeal court said the offences were extremely serious and found no error of principle in the sentences.
The court heard that on 8 June 2013 Maughan contravened a safety order and assaulted his wife, Ann Maughan, at their home. The judgment said he demanded money for gambling and, when she refused, hit her four or five times on the head with a brush handle, leaving a bleeding cut. She called gardaí and made a statement.
Ten days later, while she was in bed with two young children, he threatened her with a carpet knife, according to her statement to gardaí. The judgment records that she said he told her to drop the charges and warned he would kill her if he went to prison. At trial, she said her statements about the assault and threats were lies. The trial judge admitted them after finding they had been made voluntarily and were reliable.
The jury convicted Maughan of four counts: threatening to kill or cause serious harm, assault causing harm, witness intimidation and contravening a safety order. The appeal judgment describes the sentences as three years for the first count, two years consecutive for the second, and three years concurrent for the third; the safety-order offence was taken into consideration. The two-year term made the effective sentence five years.
Maughan argued that the total sentence was excessive, that mitigating circumstances and his family circumstances had not received sufficient weight, and that his lack of remorse should not have been treated as aggravating. The appeal court noted the sentencing judge’s account of his unresolved personal difficulties, history of addiction and risk of reoffending. It said the effect of imprisonment on children was relevant, but would not ordinarily justify reducing an otherwise appropriate significant custodial sentence.
The court said the threat-to-kill offence was probably the most serious and that a five-year sentence had been identified as appropriate for it. It found the two-year term imposed for that count reflected proportionality and totality, “almost to the point of leniency”. The appeal was dismissed.
The court also acknowledged Maughan’s rehabilitation since his incarceration, citing certificates for courses including addiction awareness, parenting skills and anger management. It said these achievements would benefit him on release, which it described as expected in the not-too-distant future.