Man guilty on one count of sexual assault, jury deadlocked on rest
The trial was held at Waterford Courthouse.
A man has been found guilty on one charge of sexual assault against a teenage girl. He had been charged with six counts of sexual assault but the jury failed to reach a verdict on the five other charges.
The trial was held in camera at Waterford Circuit Court with reporting restrictions in place to protect the identities of the involved parties.
The jury of four women and eight men were given strict directions by Judge Eugene O’Kelly to not discuss or divulge any detail from the trial outside of the jury room.
The jury deliberated for nearly 10 hours before informing Judge O'Kelly that they were in a 'dead-lock' on all charges bar one.
Judge O'Kelly informed the jury that the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) will be contacted for further instructions, but that their role had come to an end.
He said: "I know it may seem like an anti-climax. It is unfortunate you have been unable to reach a verdict but disagreements, the fact you have different views on it, is quite understandable."
Judge O'Kelly excused the jury for six years.
Judge O'Kelly requested that the identity of the accused not be disclosed pending the instructions of the DPP. The accused was remanded on bail.
David Bulbulia BL and Tara Geoghegan BL represented the accused under the instruction of solicitor Michael Lanigan.
Eoghan Cole SC acted on behalf of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), alongside John William Fennelly BL.
Mr Cole officially opened the trial on December 3, addressing the jury about the difference between inference and speculation: “You cannot speculate, but you can make reasonable inferences on what is presented to you.”
Mr Cole stressed that the act of sexual assault is not necessarily a violent or forceful act, but an action with ‘a sexual element’ done without consent.
He said: “In terms of consent, it is something which is continuous and clear, unambiguous and active. It’s not some vague and nebulous thing.” The complainant was the first witness to take the stand. She described how she knew of the accused since she was seven years old. She had attended an organisation where the accused worked in a senior role.
When she entered her mid-teens she said the accused would approach her in a crowded room and physically engage her.
“He started paying more attention to me. In front of other people he would grab me and start messing with my hair.”
Prosecutor Eoghan Cole later described this physical engagement as part of the grooming process, whereby an adult predator "breaks down" a targeted person's boundaries through "brazen" behaviour.
The first assault was alleged to have happened in the accused’s car in summer 2004, when the complainant was 15 years old. She claimed that the man grabbed her by her head and pulled her towards his groin area, while he was on the phone. When asked by Mr Cole if she understood why that happened, she said no. She said: “I don’t know if it was anything sexual at all.”
The complainant went on to describe an incident soon afterwards whereby the accused "jumped out" at her inside the premises of the organisation.
They were alone in a room when he allegedly picked her up and "straddled" her on the ground, touching her body and chest. The complainant described laughing off the incident at the time, claiming: “I thought he was messing.”
Mr Bulbulia asked why his client would act so recklessly in the presence of CCTV. The complainant said that the accused had his back turned to the camera and that he "controlled the CCTV".
Later on during that time period, the complainant described another incident on the premises of the organisation. In her testimony, she claimed that the man snuck up on her. She was on a phone call with another member of the organisation when the man reportedly began groping her all over her body and rubbing up against her. At one point, he is said to have taken out his penis and was "waving it around like a toy" and "coaxing" her to touch it. The complainant described seeing a woman involved in the organisation standing nearby. The witness said she felt embarrassed seeing the woman, feeling like she "knew what was going on".
The complainant alleged an incident took place in autumn 2004 when the accused brought her to his house and performed multiple sexual acts on her.
She stated: “He asked me to wear my school uniform.”
She said that when she was brought into the sitting room, the accused began groping her. She said: “He was mauling me.”
According to her statement, he brought her into a bedroom, where he continued to assault her before ejaculating onto her body.
The sixth charge, the only charge on which the jury returned a majority verdict of guilty, related to an incident where the accused groped the girl on her rear as she exited from a vehicle he was driving.
In the closing address to the jury, Mr Cole advised the jury to not be "duped into accepting his warped presentation" of the events.
He said: "It is a myth that a victim of sexual assault would protest, it doesn't happen like that. They find themselves unable to react."
Mr Bulbulia told the jury that while an allegation of child sexual abuse is "repellent"; "a false allegation of child sexual abuse is equally repellent."
He said that the accused and the complainant had been in a consensual sexual relationship and that the complainant had "distorted" the timeline of events.
He said: "We're getting deep into human emotions at a remove of 20 years."
The matter will be up for mention in Waterford Circuit Court on Friday, December 19.
