Jail term doubled for teacher who exploited girl (16)
TEEN SEXUALLY EXPLOITED BY MAN THROUGH SOCIAL MEDIA
The one-year jail term handed down to a married secondary school teacher who sexually exploited a 16-year-old girl through Instagram was too lenient, the Court of Appeal has ruled in doubling his sentence.
The three-judge court had heard a probation report found that the defendant John Murphy (43) has some “in-built hostility to women” and was at medium risk of reoffending.
Murphy, a married father of one with an address at Ferncourt Crescent, Ballycullen in Dublin, pleaded guilty at Wicklow Circuit Criminal Court in July last year to a charge of the sexual exploitation of the then 16-year-old victim on dates between June 2017 and June 2018.
The Galway native also pleaded guilty to possession of child abuse images, relating to two videos of graphic content. Those offences occurred in 2008 and 2010.
Appealing the leniency of the sentence given to Murphy earlier this month, Roisin Lacey SC, for the Director of Public Prosecutions, said that when passing sentence, Judge Cormac Quinn had failed to adequately take into account a number of aggravating factors. Murphy, she said, carried on the communications with the vulnerable 16-year-old for a whole year while he was a secondary school teacher and she was doing her junior certificate exams.
Ms Lacey said the sentencing judge had put too much weight on mitigating factors, such as Murphy’s good career and lack of previous convictions, and not enough weight on the aggravating factors. The offending had a serious impact on the victim, she said.
In ruling on the State’s application to overturn the sentence at the Court of Appeal today, Mr Justice George Birmingham said the trial judge’s assessment that the accused might not have been aware of the specific vulnerabilities of the injured party “might seem generous”.
“A probation report records the accused as acknowledging his awareness of the victim’s mental health difficulties and his eagerness to affirm that these difficulties predated his contact with her. The complainant had referred to self-harm and to the fact that years earlier she had been diagnosed as clinically depressed,” said Mr Justice Birmingham.
The trial judge took into account Murphy’s personal circumstances by way of mitigation in that the accused was 42 years old at the time of his sentencing, married, had a young child, came from a good family and benefited from their support, said Mr Justice Birmingham.
Early pleas of guilty also avoided any issue regarding the search warrant which resulted in gardaí accessing the computer devices on which the child abuse images were located, noted Mr Justice Birmingham.
Mr Justice Birmingham said the trial judge said that “bearing in mind the issues set out in the probation report and to incentivise and to ensure rehabilitation, I am going to suspend the final two years of that sentence”.
Mr Justice Birmingham noted the trial judge had said that, having regard to “the issues set out in the probation report” and to “incentivise and to ensure rehabilitation”, he would suspend the final two years of the sentence.
“The respondent knew, or out to have known, he was dealing with a vulnerable complainant and even if he did not have specific knowledge of the complainant’s individual vulnerabilities, and we think he did, as a teacher, he must have known that a child of that age was vulnerable,” said Mr Justice Birmingham.
The child abuse material was “placed in category one”, the judge also noted.
“Accessing the material had taken place in 2007 to 2010, and a consecutive sentence, though technically available, would seem harsh. On the other hand, the possession of such material is not a matter to be ignored,” said Mr Justice Birmingham.
“Had the judge arrived at a sentence of three years and left matters there it seems to us that the sentence would have been a not inappropriate one, and one with which we would not have been minded to interfere with,” he said.Mr Justice Birmingham said the court was of the view that suspending two years of the three-year sentence was “excessive and amounted to an error”.
Resentencing as of Monday’s date, he said the court was prepared to suspend the final 12 months of the adjusted three-year sentence.