The Court of Criminal Appeal has rejected Michael Boyce’s attempt to overturn convictions arising from repeated sexual attacks on a woman in her rural home over more than a decade.
The complainant, who was 55 when the first attack occurred in 1983, lived alone in an isolated house. She described a recurring pattern in which an assailant entered after dark, forced her to the ground and sexually assaulted her. She told the trial that she believed the same man was responsible each time, although she could not identify Boyce as her attacker.
A Central Criminal Court jury convicted Boyce of offences including indecent assault, rape, sexual assault and attempted rape. Sentences ranged from three to eight years, with the eight-year term imposed on the rape conviction relating to December 1989.
A central issue on appeal concerned DNA evidence. Gardaí obtained a blood sample from Boyce after his arrest in July 1996. He had voluntarily agreed to give the sample. The defence argued that it was unlawful because Gardaí had not used the formal procedures in the Criminal Justice (Forensic Evidence) Act 1990.
The appeal court rejected that argument. It held that the 1990 Act created an additional statutory regime, including consequences where consent was refused, but did not abolish the existing ability of Gardaí to receive forensic samples voluntarily provided by people in custody.
The prosecution relied on DNA matches between Boyce’s blood and semen stains recovered from the complainant’s underwear following the 1989 and 1991 attacks. Expert evidence placed the rarity of the matches at approximately one in five million and one in six million using two databases.
The court held that the DNA evidence did not stand entirely alone. It could be considered alongside the complainant’s evidence about the repeated attacks, similarities between them and other circumstantial evidence.
Challenges concerning delay, corroboration, the chain of evidence, additional witnesses and the conduct of the trial judge were also rejected. The application for leave to appeal was dismissed.