The Court of Appeal has dismissed an appeal by a man convicted of eight counts of sexual assault, rejecting arguments that the jury’s verdicts were perverse, that the case should have been withdrawn from the jury, and that the defence case was inadequately summarised.
The judgment, delivered by Ms Justice Kennedy on 15 December 2020, concerned offences for which the appellant was convicted in 2017. The complainant had been aged between nine and 10 when taught by the appellant. The alleged assaults took place between November 1991 and June 1992 at a school, including in a classroom and bathrooms. The complainant reported the matter to Gardaí in 2015.
The appeal court said the complainant described the locations and nature of the abuse and said it occurred regularly during a particular school year. It considered the complainant’s evidence “cogent and resolute” and said any inconsistencies, including one concerning an incident near the sports pitches, were for the jury to assess. It rejected the claim that the evidence was too sparse, adding that concise evidence was not thereby without force.
The appellant had argued that only three incidents were described in detail, that there were inconsistencies and a lack of specific dates and times, and that some events would have been seen by other school staff. He denied touching the complainant. The court said conflicts between the prosecution and defence evidence were for the jury, which had been directed to consider each count separately and apply the criminal standard of proof. It said the jury’s 75-minute deliberation did not establish that its verdicts were unsafe.
The court also upheld the trial judge’s refusal to direct acquittals at the close of the prosecution case. The judge had ruled there was sufficient evidence on all counts, including evidence about time, place and incidents, for the jury to decide what happened. The appeal court found no error in that decision.
On the defence-summary ground, the court said the judge acceded to the defence request, reminded jurors that the appellant denied touching or assaulting the complainant, and told them to consider his evidence fairly. After the jury asked, the judge also read from a comprehensive note of the evidence. The appeal court concluded that the charge was balanced and fair and that there was no basis to find the trial unsatisfactory or the convictions unsafe. The appeal was dismissed.