Fight to name child rapist

LAWYERS for several news organisations are seeking sight of submissions made in the State’s appeal against a judgement preventing the publication of the name of a convicted child rapist.

In March 2019 a Central Criminal Court jury convicted the now 49-year-old Wicklow man of repeated sexual attacks on a neighbouring child when she was aged approximately nine.

The man had pleaded not guilty to four counts of rape and two counts of indecent assault in Co Wicklow on unknown dates between 1987 and 1989. Mr Justice Michael White imposed a seven-year sentence the following May.

At that time he continued an order, made during the trial, preventing the publication of the identity of both parties. He said he made this order at the request of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).

Lawyers for the DPP subsequently brought the case back before Mr Justice White seeking to have the order lifted, as the woman wished to waive her anonymity so her abuser could be named. The publication of the accused’s name could have identified the victim because they were neighbours and the victim would need to waive her legal anonymity in order for the rapist to be named.

The man’s defence counsel challenged the application and submitted that there was no basis in law for the anonymity of complainants to be set aside.

In a judgement delivered in November 2019, Mr Justice White said the defence view that that court does not have jurisdiction to allow a complainant disclose her identity was incorrect.

However, Mr Justice White found the application by the DPP in this specific case came after the trial and the court no longer had a mandate to alter the order made during the course of the trial.

The DPP is seeking to appeal that judgement and the case was mentioned last Wednesday at a remote call-over list of cases due to be heard before the Court of Appeal.

Mr Luan O Braonain SC, appearing on behalf of several news organisations including RTE and the Irish Independent, said the media had been invited to participate in the case at the instigation of the court.

He said the case raised issues relating to the anonymity of accused persons that were of potential relevance both to the public interest and the media.

In order to decide on whether they could be meaningfully helpful or were “just going to prolong matters”, he said his clients were seeking to have sight of the notice of appeal and the submissions made by both the man and the DPP when they are finalised.

Mr Paul Murray SC, on behalf of the DPP, told the court that there was “no objection whatsoever” to the application. Counsel for the respondent, Mr Eoin Gallagher BL, said that if the court made the order he would not take issue with it.

The President of the Court of Appeal, Mr Justice George Birmingham, said the court would make the order granting the media access to the finalised submissions on a provisional basis, so as to allow the respondent reopen the issue if necessary.

The case was then put back to the next ‘list to fix dates’ before the Court of Appeal later this month.