Man who met teenage boy on Grindr receives suspended prison sentence

By Darragh McCann, The Wicklow People

A Dublin man has avoided an immediate custodial sentence after engaging in a sexual act with a 16-year-old boy he met through the dating app Grindr.

The man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, appeared at a sitting of Wicklow Circuit Criminal Court for sentencing, after pleading guilty to one count of engaging in a sexual act with a child under the age of 17.

Detective Garda Dave Smith attached to An Garda Síochána’s Divisional Protective Services Unit in Wicklow town, testified that he received the initial complaint in December 2020, after the complainant confided in his sister about the two meetings with the accused, which occurred in 2019 over a two-day period.

He said that the victim was interviewed by specialist detectives.

The victim said he was 16 years old when he met with the accused, who was more than 10 years older. They made contact through the gay dating app Grindr before moving their conversation to Snapchat, where they arranged to meet.

Counsel for the prosecution, James Kelly, informed the court that the accused came to County Wicklow to meet the teenage boy in the early hours of the morning, with the victim sneaking out of his family home and meeting the man in what was described as a “wooded area”.

It was noted that, prior to the meeting, the accused exchanged X-rated photos with the man.

Mr Kelly said that the complainant “did not use any subterfuge” and “did not hide his identity”.

Det Gda Smith told Judge Sinéad Ní Chúlacháin that multiple sexual acts were exchanged, including both oral and anal sex.

“It was the first time I met a lad or done anything with somebody,” said the victim.

During the investigation, the victim could identify several items from the accused’s car, and agreed to meet him again, before blocking him on all apps.

The defendant met with gardaí in December 2021, where nothing of a probative nature was said.

He later returned to the garda station with a prepared statement outlining his personal background and “his lack of a criminal record, as he has no previous convictions”.

However, during another interview, he did not deny meeting the victim, but said he believed he was over the age of consent, stating: “He spoke and carried himself with confidence, so I had no reason to question his age.”

In a victim impact statement, which was read to the court by Mr Kelly, the complainant said the accused’s actions had affected every aspect of his life over the past seven years.

He said he went from being an outgoing teenager to a “quieter teen” who shut himself down because he could not process what the accused had done to him.

The complainant said that, as time went on, he withdrew from others, felt his voice “didn’t matter” and lost the confidence he once had.

He told the court the incident occurred while he was still in school, with rumours spreading afterwards, forcing him to disclose what had happened to his school principal.

The victim said he could not escape what had happened and that it had left him struggling to trust other people. Although the accused later left the country, he said the impact of the offending had continued to affect him into adulthood.

“I feel sorry for the little boy I was,” said the victim.

The complainant said he had often felt ashamed and was repeatedly confronted by what had happened, but thanked his parents for the support they had given him throughout the process.

He concluded by asking the court to understand the lasting impact the offending had had on his life.

A European Arrest Warrant was issued for the defendant after he fled the country following his interview with gardaí.

Senior counsel for the defendant, Michael Bowman, said that he could not excuse his client’s behaviour as he was a grown man, but remarked that he comes from a prosocial family.

He added that, had the matter gone to trial, it would have been a “robust and difficult case to prosecute”.

Mr Bowman told Judge Ní Chúlacháin that the case had very few aggravating factors, with the age discrepancy being the main one. He argued that there was no suggestion that the accused tried to “render the injured party vulnerable with alcohol or drugs”.

In mitigation, the court was told that the defendant is remorseful for his actions, with a letter of apology being read on his behalf.

It stated: “I hope me pleading guilty will help heal your wounds,” adding, “I take full responsibility for my actions. I never meant to hurt you.”

The accused struggled to come out of the closet until he was in his 20s as “there is still social resistance”, the court was told

Mr Kelly, stated that the offence carries a maximum sentence of seven years imprisonment.

Senior counsel told the court that the defendant is now a registered sex offender and that the conviction “will stand for the rest of his life”, adding that “this was not insignificant and that he would have to remain living within the community with the consequences of his offending”.

He said the accused would engage with any recommendations or conditions imposed by the court. The accused is employed, and “has financial means”.

Judge Ní Chúlacháin in her judgement, said there was a 10-year age difference between the complainant, who was 16 at the time, and the accused, who was more than 10 years older.

The judge said the offending had a “serious effect” on the complainant, impacting his schooling, his ability to trust others and continuing to affect him throughout his life.

She added that the delay in bringing the matter to conclusion had prolonged his “hypervigilance”.

However, Judge Ní Chúlacháin accepted there was no evidence that the accused had abused a position of dominance or used alcohol or drugs to induce the complainant into the sexual acts.

She also accepted that the accused did not seek out a child or intend to “defile a child”, but said “he nevertheless took a significant risk by failing to properly establish the complainant’s age”.

Judge Ní Chúlacháin set a headline sentence of two years and four months imprisonment.

She noted that the accused was willing to pay €2,500 towards counselling for the complainant and could face further civil liability arising from the offending.

“It is not an eye for an eye. I cannot restore his innocence,” the judge said.

Judge Ní Chúlacháin concluded that the complainant’s interests would not be served by the immediate imposition of a custodial sentence, placing particular emphasis on rehabilitation.

She imposed an 18-month sentence, which she suspended in its entirety on condition that the accused remain under the supervision of the Probation Service.

The court heard that the accused lives abroad with his boyfriend.

Judge Ní Chúlacháin directed that he remain within the jurisdiction until discharged by the Probation Service and that, if he leaves the State, the matter would be re-entered.

The victim chose to waive his right to anonymity, but due to further legal reasons the complainant still could not be named.