Latest news with #AnneMarieLawlor

BreakingNews.ie

Trial of two men and woman accused of sexually abusing young girl reaches closing stages

The trial of two men and a woman accused of the rape and sexual assault of a young girl has reached its closing stages. Jurors in the Central Criminal Court trial heard closing speeches on behalf of the prosecution and the three defendants on Monday. Advertisement The complainant's mother, who is in her 50s, has pleaded not guilty to 13 counts of sexual assault on dates between 2000 and 2009, and between 2012 and 2014, primarily at the family home. She also pleaded not guilty to one count of rape, in that she facilitated the rape of the complainant by her uncle. The complainant's uncle, who is in his 40s, has pleaded not guilty to five counts of rape and one of oral rape on dates between 2003 and 2012, all at the family home. A second man, who in his 50s, has pleaded not guilty to one count of oral rape between 2008 and 2009 at the same address. The jury has heard he was a friend of the accused woman's then partner. Advertisement The three defendants cannot be named for legal reasons. Closing the case on behalf of the prosecution, senior counsel Anne-Marie Lawlor asked jurors to consider if the complainant had 'come here to tell you a pack of lies, a manufactured, fabricated account of abuse'. She continued by asking the jury to consider if the complainant told lies in her initial statement to gardaí in 2019, then maintained 'a fabricated, made up account of what happened to her' since then. Ms Lawlor submitted that the complainant was telling the truth, without 'embellishment'. Advertisement She told jurors they must decide if the fact that the complainant cannot give other details about the alleged incidents 'detracts from the core of what she told you'. She suggested what jurors heard was 'unadulterated, unembellished, consistent evidence' from the complainant who came to court 'to tell you what happened to her'. She noted the evidence that the complainant's childhood home was 'chaotic' and that the adults had issues with alcohol. Ms Lawlor suggested the complainant's mother minimised her use of alcohol during garda interviews. Advertisement She asked the jurors to consider if the complainant's mother is 'willing to misrepresent' her alcohol intake, 'what else is she misrepresenting'. In their speeches, the three defence counsel asked jurors to exercise caution due to the passage of time since these alleged incidents occurred. They also noted the absence of evidence to corroborate the allegations made by the complainant, and to consider the reliability and consistency of her evidence. Desmond Dockery SC, representing the complainant's mother, said his client was 'never in trouble in her life' and 'never expected to find herself here today'. He told jurors they 'must not conflate' alcohol abuse or other issues in the household with the separate issue of sexual misconduct. Advertisement He noted the complainant said his client sexually assaulted her for the first time when she was approximately three-and-a-half. He asked the jury to consider if anyone could reliably remember events from that age. Mr Dockery asked the jurors if they can be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt in relation to a 'bare assertion shorn of details'. Later, he suggested that the allegations made against his client cannot be 'roadtested' as the complainant cannot remember details. Referring to the allegation that his client facilitated the rape of her daughter by her brother, he told jurors that if they find the complainant's uncle guilty of rape, it does not follow that his client aided and abetted this. He told jurors they must be convinced his client was in the room and knew what was going to happen. He suggested the evidence was not there to show this. Mr Dockery said if jurors find the complainant's uncle not guilty on this rape, they must also acquit his client. Counsel suggested that his client's reaction was of shock, sadness and disappointment when interviewed by gardai He accepted that his client appeared to have minimised her consumption of alcohol when speaking to gardai, but suggested anyone who has issues with alcohol may do this. Mr Dockery told jurors that not guilty verdicts do not mean his client is innocent or the complainant 'not worthy of belief'. 'All they would mean is that this is one of those cases that is not capable of being proven to a standard beyond reasonable doubt,' he said. In his closing speech for the complainant's uncle, Michael Lynn SC submitted the key question was not whether complainant is telling lies, but whether the evidence is sufficient to convince jurors beyond a reasonable doubt of his client's guilt. He noted the complainant made no allegations of a sexual nature when speaking to the gardai in 2015 about a separate matter. Counsel also referred to the complainant's counselling notes from 2016, which state she said her uncle did not sexually or physically abuse her. He noted that the counselling records from 2016 also refer to the complainant getting memories and being unsure if they are real or not. Mr Lynn pointed to a letter written by the complainant in 2019, where she referred to allegations against her mother and other males, without being able to recall the details. Mr Lynn noted that the complainant began to attend counselling with a rape crisis centre shortly after writing this letter and it 'seems from that moment on, these beliefs about [her uncle] are formed'. 'You can't convict someone on a feeling or belief that something happened,' Mr Lynn submitted, suggesting later that 'these do seem to be beliefs that are formed in 2019 onwards'. He also suggested jurors consider the different accounts of the complainant and the two female family friends in relation to the breakdown of their relationship when assessing the complainant's credibility. Damien Colgan SC, defending the second man, asked jurors to look at his client's interviews with gardai, where he refers to the complainant as a 'lady'. He suggested this indicated his client's attitude to the complainant, that she is a 'lady' and 'he would never touch a lady'. Mr Colgan asked jurors to consider the complainant's direct evidence that she was 13 when this alleged incident occurred and her acknowledgement in cross-examination that she said that she was 11 in her garda statements. He described this as a 'glaring mistake', adding there is a 'big difference' between an 11-year-old and 13-year-old. He suggested the complainant was 'caught out on her own evidence, before cross-examination'. Mr Colgan suggested the complainant had told 'mistruths', or what she referred to as 'mistakes'. 'If they are mistakes, they are serious, big mistakes,' counsel said. Ireland €60m whiskey contract dispute between firms settle... Read More Mr Colgan said the complainant agreed his client didn't threaten her to keep this alleged incident a secret and she could have told others what had happened. In relation to the complainant's evidence that his client told her 'your mother knows', Mr Colgan suggested an 11-year-old and 13-year-old would 'confront their mother', but the complainant did not do this. The trial continues befor Ms Justice Eileen Creedon and the jury. If you have been affected by any of the issues raised in this article, you can call the national 24-hour Rape Crisis Helpline at 1800-77 8888, access text service and webchat options at or visit Rape Crisis Help.