Louth man fails in appeal against sentence for rape at a house party

A convicted rapist who forced his victim into the "trauma of giving evidence in the witness box" by not facing up to his guilt at trial has had his seven-year jail term upheld by the Court of Appeal.

In her victim impact statement, the victim told how she would lie in bed and picture all the ways she could end her life after she was raped at a May 2017 house party while she slept.

The appellant, a 26-year-old Louth resident, was jailed for seven years for the rape after he was convicted by a Central Criminal Court jury in October 2021.

The man had pleaded not (NOT) guilty to a single charge of rape but was found guilty by a majority jury and sentenced to eight years imprisonment with the final year suspended for one year by Ms Justice Eileen Creedon in February 2022.

The man accepted the jury’s verdict but maintained that he has no memory of the offending due to his alcohol consumption on the night.

The man then appealed against the length of his jail term, arguing that the pre-mitigation headline sentence of nine years was too high and that not enough weight had been given to mitigating factors in the case.

At the Court of Appeal yesterday, Tuesday February 22nd, John D Fitzgerald SC, for the appellant, said both parties were known to each other and had a considerable amount of drink before the rape occurred.

Mr Fitzgerald said that his client had tried to sleep in another bed in the house before being directed to the bedroom where the complainant was asleep after she became unwell due to alcohol consumption.

Counsel said the woman was 21 at the time and had been attending the party along with her sister and one other person on the night.

Mr Fitzgerald said the man went into the bedroom where the complainant was asleep and spoke her name to her and then had sexual intercourse with her, as she slept.

The woman awoke as he was having penetrative sex with her and went to tell her sister.

Mr Justice John Edwards, presiding at the non-jury, three-judge court, remarked that it could not be said consent could have been given in circumstances where the woman was already asleep when he started having sex with her.

Mr Justice Edwards said that while the man's lawyers put forward that there was no aggravating violence in the case, all rape "in itself is intrinsically violent".

Mr Fitzgerald said that the man, even though he claimed he had no memory of the rape, apologised for his behaviour in messages to the woman the next day.

Mr Fitzgerald said his client's narrative during the trial did not change in that he consistently said he could not recall the events of the night, adding that the appellant did not invent another account of the events of the night.

Counsel added that his client was not known to gardaí and had not come to their attention before or after the rape.

Mr Justice Edwards said the man had "violated" his victim and then taken "strategic" choices at his trial that forced the woman to give evidence from a witness box before submitting a "severe" victim impact statement.

Mr Justice Edwards said the woman had the right to sleep "unmolested" in the house and had gone to bed after being sick, which left her "vulnerable".

Philip Rahn SC, for the State, said the woman had the right to feel safe in the bed when the accused came into the bedroom and took off his clothes before raping her.

Mr Rahn said there had been "very significant" harm done to the woman, as evinced in her "eloquent and lengthy" victim impact statement.

Mr Rahn said the trial judge had not erred in fixing nine years' imprisonment as a headline sentence in a case where the accused did not avail of a guilty plea which would have aided his mitigation.

Counsel said the sentencing judge gave a "careful and considered" reasoning regarding the sentence and was also best placed to do so after hearing the trial.

Mr Rahn said there was no error in principle made by the judge in fixing the headline sentence as it was within the range available to Ms Justice Creedon.

In dismissing the appeal yesterday, Tuesday, Mr Justice Edwards said the Court of Appeal was "satisfied that an error in principle had not been established" by the appellant.

Mr Justice Edwards said the Court of Appeal found "without hesitation" that the trial judge had correctly fixed the headline sentence in the category available to them and said the sentence was not "exceptional or unusual" enough to warrant intervention.

Mr Justice Edwards said the "single most important piece of mitigation" - a guilty plea - was not available to the man due to his denial of the rape.

He said the injured party was therefore forced into the "trauma of giving evidence in the witness box" due to the man not facing up to his guilt for causing her "very serious" harm.