DPP v RT
 IECCC 1
THE HIGH COURT
2010/0094CCDP - Sheehan - High - 2/3/2012 - 2012 13 3782 2012 IECCC 1
CRIMINAL LAW (RAPE) (AMDT) ACT 1990 S2
SEX OFFENDERS ACT 2001 S37
OFFENCES AGAINST THE PERSON ACT 1861 S48 (UK)
CRIMINAL LAW (RAPE AMDT) ACT 1990 S21
DPP v M
DPP v MCCORMACK
DPP v DROUGHT UNREP CHARLETON 4.5.2007 2007/18/3617 2007 IEHC 310
DPP v W (TC) UNREP CCA 14.10.2010 2010/17/4226 2010 IECCA 95
DPP v BYRNE UNREP CCA 31.1.2000 2000/7/2442
DPP v O'C (P) UNREP CCA 5.11.2009 2009/18/4374 2009 IECCA 116
DPP v D (G) UNREP CCA 13.7.2004 2004/15/3395
O'MALLEY SENTENCING LAW AND PRACTICE 2ED 2006 459
SEX OFFENDERS ACT 2001 S8(3)(D)
SEX OFFENDERS ACT 2001 S28
Sexual assault - Principles of sentencing - Mitigating factors - Previous convictions - Character of accused - Range of sentences - Sex offenders register - Whether appropriate to impose suspended sentence - Whether appropriate to order post-release supervision - The People (DPP) v M; The People (DPP) v McCormack ; The People (DPP) v Drought  IEHC 310, (Unrep, Charleton J, 4/5/2007); The People (DPP) v TCW  IECCA 95, (Unrep, CCA, 14/10/2010); The People (DPP) v Byrne (Unrep, CCA, 31/1/2000); The People (DPP) v PO'C  IECCA 116, (Unrep, CCA, 5/11/2009) and The People (DPP) v GD (Unrep, CCA, 13/7/2004) considered - Offences Against the Person Act 1861 (UK), s 48 - Criminal Law (Rape) Act 1981 (No 10), s 2 - Criminal Law (Rape) Amendment Act 1990 (No 2), ss 2 & 21 - Sex Offenders Act 2001 (No 18), ss 8, 28 and 37 - Suspended sentence imposed (2010/0094CCDP - Sheehan J - 2/3/2012)  IECCC 1
People, (DPP) v RT
2 [1.1] The accused was charged with two offences arising out of the same incident; namely the offence of sexual assault against C.M. contrary to s.2 of the Criminal Law (Rape) (Amendment) Act 1990 as amended by s.37 of the Sex Offenders Act 2001 and the offence of rape contrary to s.48 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 and s.2 of the Criminal Law (Rape) Act 1981 as amended by s. 21 of the Criminal Law (Rape) (Amendment) Act 1990. On the 15th November 2011, the jury in the trial before the Central Criminal Court acquitted the accused of the charge of rape but found him guilty of the sexual assault of C.M.
2 [2.1] The circumstances in which the offence took place can be described as follows. The events occurred on the 24 th January 2010. C.M. is the sister of E.M. who, at the time of the assault, was living with R.T., their young child and E.M's two children from a previous relationship. On the 23 rd January, C.M. went to her sister E.M's house, with her seven year old son and three year old daughter, intending to spend the night with her and staying over at her home as was common practice. During the course of the evening, the children went to bed. E.M. and C.M. had some wine and R.T. and E.M's eldest son, J.M., went out socialising.
3 [2.2] At approximately 3am on the morning of the 24 th January, R.T., J.M. and another friend returned to the house. They were drinking alcohol and chatting and at approximately 4am, E.M. went to bed, followed...
To continue readingREQUEST YOUR TRIAL