The Court of Criminal Appeal has refused Gerald McNeill leave to appeal convictions arising from sexual offences against a young female neighbour in Trien, Castlerea, County Roscommon.
McNeill was tried before Mr Justice Abbott and a jury in the Central Criminal Court in April 2004. The complainant was aged between eight and 17 during the period covered by the allegations, while McNeill was in his fifties.
The indictment contained eight counts concerning incidents between 1989 and 1997. On April 28 and 29, 2004, the jury convicted McNeill on seven counts, although on counts three and seven he was acquitted of the offences originally charged and convicted of lesser sexual offences. He was acquitted on count eight.
The principal sentence was nine years on count four. A further two years on count seven was ordered to run consecutively, producing an overall term of 11 years.
McNeill’s main appeal ground challenged Mr Justice Abbott’s decision to allow the complainant to give limited evidence of alleged sexual misconduct which was not itself charged on the indictment.
The prosecution argued that without this background the jury would receive an artificial picture of isolated incidents and would not properly understand how the relationship had allegedly developed over several years. The trial judge allowed evidence concerning the earlier period but restricted its scope, particularly in relation to later years.
Delivering the appeal court’s judgment, Mr Justice Declan Budd said Irish law permits such background misconduct evidence where it is relevant and necessary and where its probative value outweighs its prejudicial effect.
The court found that Abbott J had applied that balancing exercise carefully. It held that the evidence was capable of explaining the alleged grooming, manipulation and continuing relationship relevant to issues including consent.
The court also noted that the prosecution treated the additional allegations in a restrained way and did not cross-examine McNeill about them.
It concluded that the jury had acted on an overwhelming volume of proven evidence and refused leave to appeal against conviction.