Man on bail for abusing nieces raped another girl

He was arrested days before he went on trial for attacking girls, court told

A MAN serving 13 years for sexually abusing four of his nieces was on bail for these crimes when he raped another child, the Central Criminal Court has been told.

The 50-year-old man pleaded guilty to four counts of rape of the child on dates between May 2013 and January 2017 when she was aged just nine to 12 years old.

The court heard how, in the latest case, two of the man’s family members had noticed him around the child at an outdoor location.

This was after the last time he raped the girl.

The family members saw him running away from the child and the court heard he was on bail at the time for abusing four of his nieces.

One of his bail conditions was that he stay away from children.

The man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was sentenced to 13 years last year for sexually abusing his nieces.

He had pleaded guilty to seven charges, including three of rape and one sexual assault of one niece on dates between June and August 2006 when she was seven years old.

He had also pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting her older sister three years previously when she was also aged seven.

He also admitted two charges each of sexually assaulting their then nine-year-old and 16-yearold cousins on dates between October 2001 and June 2010.

The court heard that in the most recent offences, the man had met up with the child as she walked her dog and took her behind a wall at an external location.

He kissed and touched her before bringing her to another location nearby and raping her.

She told a relative about this and then made a statement to gardaí, in which she revealed that the man had raped her on three other occasions.

The court heard that the accused accepted his behaviour was ‘all wrong’.

He was due to go on trial for sexually abusing his nieces a week-and-a-half after his arrest for the recent crimes, the court was also told.

The man described himself as ‘a bit of a loner’ and said his offences didn’t ‘feel normal’. He accepted everything the child had said in her statement and acknowledged that she had ‘roared’ in pain during one rape incident.

The court heard the man has 16 previous convictions, including the previous sexual offending, an assault from a family row and burglaries going back to the 1980s and 1990s.

Mary Rose Gearty SC, defending, said her client made early admissions and was at the bottom 1% of intellectual functioning.

The court heard the man had said he had no friends and found it easier to talk to children.

The court was also told the man had limited employment history and had suicidal ideation.

Yesterday, Judge Michael White said he must impose a custodial element to run consecutively to the 13 years the man is already serving but with a substantial portion suspended.

The judge imposed a ten-year sentence with the final six years suspended on this latest case.

Judge White imposed strict conditions on the suspended portion of the ten-year sentence.

He said the man must not reside where there is a child under the age of 18 or have any unsupervised contact with a child under 18 without prior approval by his probation officer and the local child protection agency.

DIFFICULT and disturbing as it is to even contemplate the rape of a little nine-yearold girl, it is incumbent upon us, nonetheless, to actually think about the sheer horror of that.

To consider for a moment just what that child suffered, the brutality of the attack, and both the immediate and long-term damage that was done to her. And then, having considered that, we must take on board the fact that it happened to her a second time. That the same man raped the same child again. The terror of what she went through during those attacks is simply, for right-minded people, beyond imagining. Yet we must reflect on this most grievous crime, because it is a reality: this is what a man did to this child. This is precisely what happened to her.

And yet, in reality, it didn’t need to happen at all. This man, after all, had already been charged with the serial sexual abuse of four other children. Clearly, in light of the fact that not one child was previously involved, but four of them, the evidence of multiple abuse was extremely strong.

Yet he was granted bail and, to further compound the appalling circumstances surrounding this case, it was actually acknowledged by the court that this man was a risk to youngsters; so he was instructed, while out on bail, to stay away from children. But he didn’t, of course. He raped a child.

For who on earth believes that, when told to stay away from children, a paedophile will obey that ruling. Indeed, if anything, and knowing that he is already facing prison time, he is more likely to follow his own base and predatory instincts.

It beggars belief, therefore, that the decision to give this man bail could ever have even been considered a realistic option.

Unfortunately, the suffering of that little nine-year-old girl must now, partly at least, be laid at the door of those who were directly responsible for releasing this man into the community. The courts must stop taking these outrageous risks. It’s time to put the welfare of the public first – and to particularly prioritise, at all times, the wellbeing and safety of our children.