DPP v F (D)

 
FREE EXCERPT

[2014] IECA 28

THE COURT OF APPEAL

Birmingham J.

Sheehan J.

Mahon J.

168/12
DPP v F (D)
The People at the Suit of the Director of Public Prosecutions
Respondent
V
A.L.
Appellant

89/2013 - Birmingham Sheehan Edwards - Court of Appeal - 9/12/2014 - 2014 14 4012 2014 IECA 28

Sentencing – Sexual assault – Severity of sentence – Appellant seeking to appeal against severity of sentence – Whether sentences were disproportionate

Mr. Justice Birmingham
1

In this case the appellant Mr. L. appeals against the severity of a sentence that was imposed on him on the 3rd May, 2013. The sentence under appeal is one of six years imprisonment with provision also being made for six years post release supervision.

2

The sentence was imposed in respect of one count of sexual assault. That one count referred to two victims. The maximum applicable for the offence was one of fourteen years.

3

The basic facts are that in 2007/2008 the appellant assaulted two young girls that will be referred as EB and OH when both were aged seven years. The situation is that the appellant had a daughter in the same class as the injured parties and these young girls would attend his house to play for a "play date".

4

The appellant had a basement and the children would go there and there the appellant showed the young girls adult pornographic magazines as distinct from child pornography and it appears that he sought to introduce them to the mechanics of the sexual act.

5

He encouraged the young girls to"play games" and as part of the so called game playing he would expose himself and sometimes the little girls encouraged by him would pull down his trousers. He encouraged the little girls to take off their clothes and underwear and it appears that that happened some five or six times.

6

The appellant also admitted putting the girls over his shoulders and then smacking their bare bottoms and that smacking represents the physical act that gives rise to the charge of sexual assault. It also appears that one of the girls was on one occasion asked to use a magnifying glass in order to touch his penis.

7

When the case came to court, counsel for the Director offered assistance to the court by conveying the views of the Director, and the views of the Director...

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL