Man found not guilty of sexually assaulting boy in Wicklow more than 40 years ago
The Wicklow PeopleA man has been found not guilty of sexually assaulting a boy in County Wicklow more than 40 years ago.
The defendant, who cannot be named for legal reasons, appeared at the first day of his trial at Wicklow Circuit Criminal Court on Thursday, April 16.
The man entered a plea of not guilty to two counts of indecent assault.
The case opened with counsel for the prosecution, James Kelly BL, acting on behalf of State solicitor Brian Robinson, addressing the jury, which was made up of six men and six women.
Mr Kelly explained that indecent assault is now referred to as sexual assault, but the original charge applies due to the alleged incident taking place in the 1980s.
He told the jury that in cases of an historical nature there is no CCTV footage, DNA or fingerprint evidence, and that the prosecution’s case relies on the testimony of the complainant.
A member of An Garda Síochána’s Divisional Protective Services Unit in Wicklow town was sworn in and introduced exhibits and aerial photographs from the 1970s, 1980s and 2010s of the location where the alleged indecent assault took place.
The alleged injured party testified that he lived in close proximity to the accused, had “hung around with him as a child”, and recalls him sexually abusing him on two separate occasions.
He remarked that he remembered the first occasion was in a field around October, due to the evenings getting dark. He claimed that the defendant pulled his trousers down before masturbating in front of him.
The court heard the alleged assault lasted five minutes, with the accused also said to have tried to kiss the complainant, before he got up and wiped himself off with a dock leaf. After the alleged sexual assault, the accused gave the boy 50 pence.
The complainant stated that the second occasion took place in the same location and was “similar in nature to the first instance”.
He recalled 50 pence being quite a significant sum of money due to it “being more than his pocket money”.
The court was told that the defendant “was much bigger than the complainant”, and that the alleged victim’s mother was aware of the assault due to her discovering the 50 pence.
Mr Kelly said that the alleged victim went to gardaí after he conducted some enquiries of his own and found the accused’s Facebook page, providing gardaí with a screenshot of it.
Senior counsel for the accused, Paul Murray, explained that his client denied all allegations during interview with gardaí, and said that the defendant was never friends with the alleged victim and was not aware of him, but did recall being in his older sibling’s class in school.
Mr Murray questioned whether the complainant had consulted a solicitor to pursue civil proceedings.
The complainant denied that he is going to take civil action, but remarked that he consulted a solicitor who is also a friend.
“I have confirmed on more than one occasion I won’t be taking any civil proceedings,” said the complainant.
He added that, after his friend had explained that there are time constraints on civil action, and that his name “would be in the public domain”, he chose against it.
Mr Murray questioned how the alleged assault happened, with the court hearing that the complainant claims that the accused lay on top of him with his body. Mr Murray noted that “he couldn’t find that in the statement he gave to gardaí”.
The complainant’s sibling testified that the accused became a friend several years later and was in a house where the alleged injured party lived. The sibling recalls the complainant being friends with him “over a condensed period of time”.
“It was like a summer holiday, but it wasn’t prolonged,” they said.
Detective Garda Kenny of An Garda Síochána’s Divisional Protective Services Unit told the court that when he interviewed the accused, he denied all allegations put to him and remarked that he was not friends with boys in school due to constant bullying.
Mr Murray stated that his client had never come to the attention of gardaí and met them voluntarily after they attempted to contact him at his home address.
The accused testified that he was bullied in school, both verbally and physically.
“It was bad, I only associated with girls,” said the defendant.
He added that “I was too nervous, my safe space was being at home with my mother”.
Mr Murray asked if the picture painted by the prosecution, that he hung around with the complainant and a group of other children, was true. He rejected any notion that he associated with children in the neighbourhood.
When asked about the timelines given by the complainant, the accused stated: “I wouldn’t know him if he stood in front of me,” adding, “I can’t recall being anywhere near where the assault took place”.
During cross-examination by prosecuting counsel, the defendant was asked when he came out as homosexual, to which he replied that he came out to his parents in his 20s.
Mr Kelly asked whether he had any notion he was homosexual at the time of the alleged assault, and whether he was sexually active with others or himself as a teenager, to which he replied: “I didn’t label myself and I didn’t start touching myself until I was 16.”
In his closing statement, counsel for the prosecution, Mr Kelly, reminded the jury that cases of this nature often rely on the testimony of the complainant, as there is no CCTV footage or eyewitness evidence due to the historical nature of the allegations.
He said that in every sitting of the Circuit Criminal Court there are similar cases being heard, and asked the jury whether they accepted the complainant’s account.
Mr Kelly told the jury they must decide whether they preferred the evidence given by the complainant or that of the accused.
He suggested that the 50 pence given to the complainant after the alleged incident could be viewed as “hush money”, adding that at the time “you would have bought a lot of cans of Coke with 50 pence”.
In his closing speech, Mr Murray reminded the jury that the burden of proof rests entirely with the prosecution.
He questioned whether the jury could be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt to convict the accused of offences alleged to have taken place more than 40 years ago.
He also referenced instances in recent Irish history where allegations of sexual abuse were later found to be unfounded.
Mr Murray also reminded the jury of the presumption of innocence and that the accused is entitled to the benefit of the doubt.
The jury returned after deliberations, late on the night of Friday, April 17, and found the accused unanimously not guilty on both counts.