The Court of Appeal has dismissed Richard O’Mara’s appeal against the severity of concurrent prison sentences imposed for two rapes committed in October 2015. It held that the sentences were high and at the outer limit of the trial judge’s discretion, but did not exceed that limit.
The Central Criminal Court sentenced O’Mara in June 2019 to 12 years for the first rape and 14 years for the second, with the final two years suspended on conditions. The terms were to run concurrently. His separate appeal against conviction had been dismissed in 2021; this appeal concerned sentence only.
The offences took place during an 18th birthday party at O’Mara’s family home in rural Co. Clare. The injured party was 17 and O’Mara was 27. The Court of Appeal’s judgment said he lured her from the house and raped her in a field after using violence. After they returned, he refused her request to call a taxi. She had no working phone or handbag, and the court said she was practically stranded. It found that he raped her again in the sitting room.
O’Mara’s appeal argued that the headline sentences were too high under sentencing guidance for rape cases. His counsel accepted that the victim’s age, inexperience and being lured to the field were aggravating factors, but argued they did not justify a 12-year starting sentence. The appeal also challenged the 14-year sentence for the second rape, the weight given to mitigation, and the trial judge’s failure to mention O’Mara’s heart condition. It raised concern that the judge’s reference to class may have affected sentencing.
The Director of Public Prosecutions argued that the victim’s age and intoxication, the breach of trust, violence, threats and lack of a practical way to leave supported the sentences. The respondent also said the heart condition did not make imprisonment more difficult to endure.
The Court of Appeal said it was not persuaded that the class reference influenced the sentences, or that the failure to mention the heart condition was a significant error. It found few mitigating factors, noting there had been no guilty plea or expression of remorse, while giving credit for O’Mara’s lack of previous convictions. It held that the combination of aggravating circumstances placed the offences within the middle sentencing range discussed in earlier case law. The court upheld both sentences and dismissed the appeal against severity.