The Court of Appeal has dismissed J.S.’s appeal against three rape convictions, finding that the trial judge was entitled to refuse an application to withdraw the case from the jury.
J.S. was convicted in the Central Criminal Court on 12 October 2016 and sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment, with the final six months suspended. He appealed both the convictions and the severity of the sentence. The Court of Appeal’s judgment, delivered on 26 June 2018, dealt only with the conviction appeal.
The prosecution case concerned allegations of anal penetration at a location in west Cork during three periods between 2009 and 2011. The complainant, who was just short of 14 at trial, was interviewed by specialist Garda interviewers when he was 11. A video recording of that interview was presented as his evidence in chief, followed by cross-examination. J.S. was identified in the judgment as the complainant’s uncle.
The appeal focused on whether the trial judge should have granted a direction at the close of the prosecution case. The defence argued that the complainant’s cross-examination exposed inconsistencies and gaps in his account, including about being dragged upstairs, the positions of those involved and the use of a sheet. It also pointed to evidence about how often J.S. looked after the children and conflicting accounts concerning a possible bowel prolapse and what the complainant’s father had told hospital staff.
The trial judge accepted that there were weaknesses in the prosecution case but concluded they did not make it so tenuous that the case should be withdrawn from the jury. The judge refused the application.
The Court of Appeal reviewed parts of the recorded interview and cross-examination. It said the complainant had not departed from his central allegation and had essentially restated it on re-examination. The court acknowledged that the defence had made significant progress in cross-examination, which could support an argument to the jury for a not-guilty verdict. But it held that the evidence had not reached the point where the case should have been withdrawn.
The court therefore dismissed the conviction appeal. This judgment did not determine J.S.’s separate appeal against sentence.