The Supreme Court has allowed an appeal by an anonymised man seeking to stop the remaining prosecution of historic sexual offence allegations involving his daughter.
The appellant, identified only as D.K., faced 38 charges of rape and indecent assault arising from allegations said to have occurred between 1972 and 1981, when the complainant was aged between four and 13.
The High Court had already prohibited prosecution of some of the earliest alleged offences but allowed other charges to proceed. D.K. appealed that part of the decision.
Mr Justice McCracken accepted that the complainant’s delay in making a formal Garda complaint was understandable. Her first disclosure was made to a psychiatrist in 1991, while the first formal recorded Garda complaint followed in October 1997. The judgment noted her psychiatric history and the appellant’s position as her father when considering why the complaint had not been made earlier.
The Supreme Court’s decision instead turned on whether the passage of time had left the defence unable to receive a fair trial.
Two potentially important witnesses had died. They included the appellant’s wife, who had been present at a 1991 meeting where the complainant said the appellant made a response capable of being viewed as an implicit admission, although that was disputed. A Danish family friend linked to another alleged incident had also died.
The court also highlighted the absence of psychiatric and clinical notes, the failure to identify a Garda said to have interviewed the complainant in 1992, and differences between her accounts about the age at which the alleged abuse began.
McCracken J held that no single factor necessarily required prohibition. Taken together, however, the circumstances created a real risk that D.K. would not receive a fair trial.
The appeal was therefore allowed. The judgment did not determine whether any of the alleged offences occurred.