Court grants The Irish Times access to ex-TD's character reference for convicted sex offender

Fiona Magennis

The Court of Appeal has granted The Irish Times access to character references - including one from former TD Jim Glennon - filed on behalf of a one-time government adviser convicted of sexually exploiting a 13-year-old boy at a Christian children's camp, following an application by the newspaper.

In April, the court noted that numerous character references had been submitted on behalf of the defendant Daniel Ramamoorthy, including one from a then-unnamed former TD.

Following intense media speculation, former Fianna Fail TD Jim Glennon later confirmed that he was the ex-representative who had submitted a character reference for Ramamoorthy.

Judge John Edwards, presiding at the three-judge court, said on Tuesday that, having considered the papers filed on behalf of The Irish Times, the court was satisfied the application was well laid out and more fully explained than when it had first been raised.

He said in the circumstances, the court was "happy to accede" to the request.

Judge Edwards noted that the notice of motion sought an order permitting Courts Service personnel to provide accredited media working for the applicant with access to the references, adding that this was the substantive order being made.

Precedent

Solicitor Michael Finucane, for Ramamoorthy, suggested the order could "set a precedent" for other cases.

Judge Patrick McCarthy, who sat on today's panel along with Judge Edwards and Judge Tara Burns, replied that this was “nothing to do with us”, adding that the court was simply “making an order in this case”.

At the appeal hearing on April 13th, Judge Edwards said it was “quite extraordinary” that the then-unnamed politician and several others who had provided testimonials for Ramamoorthy failed to mention either the victim or the “vile nature” of the crime.

Judge Edwards’s remarks, along with the character references supplied for the 40-year-old appellant, sparked substantial public and political debate.

When judgment in the case was delivered six days later on April 21, a solicitor for The Irish Times made an application for the newspaper to be granted access to the references given on behalf of Ramamoorthy.

However, at that point Judge Edwards refused the application, saying that a large number of references had been submitted and the court had accurately summarised the effect of these - which was that they “speak to the previous pro-social conduct” of the appellant.

In a statement later issued through a PR company, Glennon said the crimes committed by Ramamoorthy were “vile and of the most egregious nature”. He offered his “unreserved apology to the victim and to their family” and said he was "deeply sorry for contributing to their suffering".

He said writing the letter was “an error of judgment”.

References

In a grounding affidavit seeking access to the references, lawyers for the Irish Times asked the court to consider whether the controversy surrounding Glennon's reference “served the public interest or the administration of justice” and whether this would have been “ameliorated or avoided” if the details of the testimonials were made public from the outset of the sentencing process and were publicly reported during the appeal.

The affidavit also said it was clear from the appeal court’s judgement that it regarded the references as worthy of only “modest weight” on the mitigation side of the sentencing equation, but that it did regard them as evidence.

It was clear that both the sentencing judge and the Court of Appeal took them into account when considering sentence and they were accompanied by affidavits verifying their contents, the affidavit said.

It was noted that in that context, the references should be made available to the public, through accredited media, “in the public interest” as they were “clearly part of the administration of justice in this instance”.

The appeal court was also asked to consider whether its criticism of Glennon had an influence on his decision to publicly “disavow” the reference and apologise for it.

The affidavit said the court was entitled to take the view that, even if the providers of character references had “some misguided expectation of privacy” in relation to their own identities or the contents of the testimonials, this must be outweighed by “concern to ensure open justice in the court process”.

It also said there was “a strong public interest” in reporting publicly the content of Glennon’s testimonial and the other character references provided on Ramamoorthy’s behalf.

The solicitor said he was also instructed that journalists working for and on behalf of the Irish Times have found in recent years that there is “an inconsistency” in the manner in which character references are dealt with by the courts, with some judges insisting they be set out in public, while others read and summarise the testimonials without revealing details.

Conviction

Ramamoorthy was convicted following two Circuit Criminal Court trials of one count of sexually exploiting the child in 2017 by asking him to send a picture of his penis over Snapchat.

A jury in the first trial failed to reach a verdict.

The 40-year-old, with previous addresses at Whitebarn Road, Rathfarnham, and Wolnzach, Germany, continues to maintain his innocence in relation to the sexual exploitation offence.

However, he pleaded guilty to a charge of possessing child sexual abuse material, referred to in law as child pornography.

Dublin Circuit Criminal Court heard Ramamoorthy was found with three images and one video depicting young boys engaged in sexual activity with each other and with an unknown adult man.

Ramamoorthy, described in court as a motivational speaker, social media influencer and entrepreneur, had at one point acted as an adviser to the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment on start-ups, his sentencing hearing was told.

He is the son of a diplomat and was educated at Yale University in the USA.

The victim first met Ramamoorthy at a Christian camp, where he was described as “very friendly, charismatic and popular”.

In 2017, the pair got into a late-night conversation on Snapchat involving a game of truth or dare.

The game started innocently enough before Ramamoorthy asked the boy: “How big is your dick?” and requested that the child send him a photo of his penis.

Ramamoorthy then sent the teenager a photo of his pubic hair area and told him he was addicted to pornography. The boy was shocked and did not respond to Ramamoorthy, who then told him: “I win truth or dare.”

Ramamoorthy was jailed for two years and four months by Judge Sinéad McMullen at the Central Criminal Court on March 24th last year.

She described the sexual exploitation offence as a serious breach of trust.

In appealing his sentence, Ramamoorthy's lawyers had suggested the term imposed was excessive and argued that the sentencing judge had failed to give sufficient weight to their client's "exceptional background" and history of public service and his previous pro-social life.

The court rejected his appeal against his sentence, saying Ramamoorthy had not taken responsibility for the offending, that there was no acceptance of fault or criminal liability and no acknowledgement of the impact of his conduct on the victim and no "earnest" remorse.

Judge Edwards said although Ramamoorthy is a first-time offender, there was little to support a suggestion that his offending was “aberrational and truly out of character”.

On the contrary, he said, there are many “red flags” suggesting that the 40-year-old has “an abnormal sexual interest in children”.

In April, An Taoiseach Micheál Martin said he does not believe public representatives should give character references, particularly in cases “that involve sexual exploitation or sexual abuse or anything of that nature.”

Martin said he had “no idea who the TD is”.