Advertisement

We need your help now

Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.

You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.

If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.

Photocall Ireland

Munster abuse case: Father of victims denied permission to appeal life sentence by Supreme Court

The Supreme Court determined that the Court of Appeal “expressly addressed the heightened culpability of the applicant as the father of the victims”.

THE FATHER OF the victims in the Munster abuse case has failed in a bid to bring a Supreme Court appeal after arguing that increasing his sentence to life imprisonment for the “prolonged and depraved abuse” of his vulnerable children was “without sufficient justification”.

In July last year, the Court of Appeal increased the father’s sentence to life for raping his three older children and charges of abuse, neglect and child cruelty after the court found his original 15-year sentence was too lenient.

At that appeal, the mother of the children and their now 52-year-old uncle also had their jail terms increased to 12 and 18.5 years respectively, following the State’s application.

The abuse the defendants were convicted of occurred between August 2014 and April 2016, starting when three of the victims – a young girl and her two brothers – were aged between five and seven years old.

The father applied to have the Supreme Court hear his case last October, submitting that the increased sentence of life he received at the Court of Appeal was disproportionate to the 18.5 years received by the children’s uncle at the same court.

During the trial, the prosecution case was that this uncle – the husband of their maternal aunt – was “right in the middle” of the family’s affairs.

The father argued that he and the uncle of the children were similarly culpable for their crimes and that the applicant’s life sentence “constitutes an unjustified and disproportionate disparity”.

The father contended that it was a matter of general public importance that justice when sentencing be “consistent and fair” in cases where it is contended there are similarly culpable co-defendants.

He further submitted that the upward adjustment of his sentence was “without sufficient justification and undermines the principles of proportionality in sentencing”.

He further claimed the Court of Appeal had acknowledged the difference in culpability between the two men had been “only marginal”.

The Director of Public Prosecutions submitted to the Supreme Court that no matters of general public importance arose in the case. The State said that a life sentence was available in rape cases, “especially when the offences take place over a prolonged period of time” and are committed by a parent against their own children.

The DPP further argued that the applicant had higher culpability as the father of the children, while the uncle was convicted of fewer offences and was not convicted of the rape of one of the children.

In denying leave to appeal, the Supreme Court determined that the Court of Appeal “expressly addressed the heightened culpability of the applicant as the father of the victims”.

The determination read that, unlike the co-accused uncle, the father was “in a position of the most primary trust and authority over his children” and that “his actions involved prolonged abuse, neglect, and exploitation of an egregious nature”.

The Supreme Court said the Court of Appeal had noted that the father’s “role and the gravity of his offending warranted a more severe sentence, even while acknowledging the marginal difference in overall culpability”.

The court found that the father had “not demonstrated that this differentiation, rooted in the specific facts of the case, raises issues of sufficient general importance” and refused leave to appeal.

When quashing the father’s original sentence and imposing a term of life imprisonment at the Court of Appeal, Ms Justice Isobel Kennedy said the defendant was a person whom the children should have been able to rely upon for all their needs but instead he had “raped and violated” them.

She said his actions and the actions of others had “enormously damaged the lives of their young children” with the consequence they were left “emotionally, physically and psychologically traumatised”.

Ms Justice Kennedy said the father’s position of dominance within the family could not be ignored and noted all of the abuse took place against “a background of appalling neglect”.

“These children had nowhere to turn,” she said.

In total, five family members were found guilty by a Central Criminal Court jury on all but one of the 78 counts against them following a 10-week trial held at Croke Park in the summer of 2021.

They were all found guilty of sexually abusing the children on dates between August 2014 and April 2016, while the parents were also found guilty of wilfully neglecting five of the children, who were aged between one and nine during this period.

In January 2022 at the Central Criminal Court, the trial judge jailed the now 60-year-old father for 15 years after he was found guilty of all 31 offences against him. These included raping his three older children, sexual assault, sexual exploitation, wilful neglect and child cruelty.

The now 52-year-old uncle, who was found guilty of all 10 counts against him, including raping the young girl, sexually assaulting her two brothers and sexual exploitation, was jailed for 15 years.

The now 37-year-old mother was jailed for nine years having been found guilty of all 25 offences against her, including sexual assault, sexual exploitation and wilful neglect of her children.

Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation.

Close
JournalTv
News in 60 seconds