Judgment: 2018-03-06 · Court archive

Court of Appeal dismisses H.B.’s challenge to rape and sexual assault convictions

The court rejected an appeal against five convictions and the effective seven-year prison sentence, finding no basis to set aside the jury’s verdict.

Court of Appeal ·

Who, what, where, when and why

Who
  • H.B. (Appellant)
  • the complainant
  • the trial judge
What

The court rejected an appeal against five convictions and the effective seven-year prison sentence, finding no basis to set aside the jury’s verdict.

Where

Places mentioned in the report

  • Dublin
  • County Donegal
When

Judgment:

Other dates in the report
  • 7 April 2017

    The jury convicted H.B. in the Central Criminal Court on 7 April 2017, the fifth day of the trial. The court imposed seven years’ imprisonment on each rape count, with lesser concurrent terms for the sexual assault counts. The appeal judgment was delivered on 6 March 2018 by Mr Justice Birmingham, with Mr Justice Mahon and Mr Justice Hedigan also on the court.

Why

Reasons reported in the judgment

At the appeal hearing, H.B. pursued the ground that the jury’s verdict was against the weight of the evidence or perverse. Counsel argued that there were inconsistencies and difficulties in the complainant’s account. The prosecution submitted that the jury had ample evidence to consider and that its verdict was open to it. The appeal court said the alleged difficulties were matters for the jury and found no basis to overturn its verdict.

The Court of Appeal has dismissed H.B.’s appeal against convictions for two counts of rape and three counts of sexual assault, leaving in place an effective seven-year prison sentence.

The jury convicted H.B. in the Central Criminal Court on 7 April 2017, the fifth day of the trial. The court imposed seven years’ imprisonment on each rape count, with lesser concurrent terms for the sexual assault counts. The appeal judgment was delivered on 6 March 2018 by Mr Justice Birmingham, with Mr Justice Mahon and Mr Justice Hedigan also on the court.

The allegations concerned the complainant, described in the judgment as H.B.’s grandniece. The rape counts were alleged to have occurred at H.B.’s Dublin home in summer 1994, when the complainant was about 11 or 12. Three sexual assaults were alleged: two at the complainant’s family home in County Donegal between 1991 and 1994, and one in Dublin in September 1994. The allegations were evidence heard at trial; the Court of Appeal was considering the convictions, not conducting a new trial.

At the appeal hearing, H.B. pursued the ground that the jury’s verdict was against the weight of the evidence or perverse. Counsel argued that there were inconsistencies and difficulties in the complainant’s account. The prosecution submitted that the jury had ample evidence to consider and that its verdict was open to it. The appeal court said the alleged difficulties were matters for the jury and found no basis to overturn its verdict.

The judgment also addressed written-submission complaints about the trial judge’s directions to the jury. These concerned the warning about delay, the corroboration warning and the judge’s summary of the evidence. The court said the prosecution’s request for a further direction on delay had been unnecessary, but the recharge did not unbalance the charge. It was also not persuaded that the corroboration warning or the approach to summarising evidence amounted to a material failing.

The court dismissed the appeal. It therefore left the convictions and sentence undisturbed.

Read the original court judgment

Something looks wrong?

Highlight the relevant passage or flag this article for review. Review requests do not immediately change the report.

Email a correction request

Request a review