DPP v O'Brien
1989 WJSC-CCA 1345
COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL
CRIMINAL APPEAL ACT 1907
CRIMINAL APPEAL ACT 1968
COURTS (SUPPLEMENTAL PROVISIONS) ACT 1961 S12
REG V COOPER 53 CAR 82
DPP, PEOPLE V KELLY
DPP V MULLIGAN 2 FREWEN 16
DPP, PEOPLE V MADDEN ,
Appellate court - Jurisdiction - Exercise - Court of trial - Findings of fact - Held that the principles on which the court exercised its appellate jurisdiction pursuant to s. 12 of the Act of 1961 precluded the court from interfering with the findings of fact made by a jury which had been properly charged by the trial judge: ~The People v. Madden~ , ~The People v. Mulligan~ 2 Frewen 16 and ~The People v. Kelly~ applied - Courts (Supplemental Provisions) Act, 1961, s. 12 - (40/88 - C.C.A. - 21/7/89)
|The People v. O'Brien|
Judgment of the Court delivered the 21st day of July 1989 by McCarthy J.
The Applicant applies for leave to appeal against conviction on indictment on six counts, three of them attempting to have unlawful carnal knowledge of a girl under the age of 15 years and three of indecent assault. The charges arise upon incidents alleged to have taken place on a date in October 1985 when three girls, two sisters and their cousin, were alleged to have been accosted by the Applicant on a street in Kilrush, Co. Clare, invited by him to look for a straying donkey in sheds adjoining a field in the area. Whilst in the second shed the allegation was that the offences were committed. The critical evidence in the case was that of the three girls whose account differed both descriptively and in the alleged sequence of the molesting of each of them. The girls, who made no complaint of what had occurred until about a month after the event, were medically examined and found to be virgins, although each girl specifically alleged that the Applicant had had sexual intercourse with her.
The trial took place in February 1988, some 2½ years after the alleged commission of the offences. The case depended upon the evidence of the three girls, there being no corroboration of their evidence and, in a sense, there was medical evidence to contradict their account.
The application is based upon the contention that the verdict of the jury was perverse. Mr. Sorohan developed an elaborate argument based upon a comparison of the relevant English Statutes of 1907 and...
To continue readingREQUEST YOUR TRIAL