The People (At the Suit of the DPP) v Richard O'Mara
| Jurisdiction | Ireland |
| Judge | Ní Raifeartaigh J. |
| Judgment Date | 22 March 2022 |
| Neutral Citation | [2022] IECA 72 |
| Docket Number | Court of Appeal Record No: 147/19 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Ireland) |
[2022] IECA 72
McCarthy J.
Kennedy J.
Ní Raifeartaigh J.
Court of Appeal Record No: 147/19
THE COURT OF APPEAL
CRIMINAL
Judgment of the Court delivered by Ní Raifeartaigh J. on the 22 March 2022
. This is an appeal against severity in respect of a sentence imposed by the Central Criminal Court (Burns J.) on the 6 June 2019.
. The appellant had pleaded not guilty to two counts of rape. He was convicted following a trial which commenced on the 28 March 2019 and concluded on the 11 April 2019. The sentencing hearing took place on the 23 May 2019. The trial judge imposed a 12-year sentence and a 14-year sentence to run concurrently, with the final two years of the 14-year sentence suspended upon conditions.
. An appeal against conviction was dismissed by this Court on the 27 September 2021 and the facts are more fully set out in that judgment ( [2021] IECA 243). The following is a very brief outline for present purposes.
. The offences took place on the 17/18 October 2015 at the family home of the appellant at an address in Co. Clare. The injured party was aged 17 at the time and the appellant was 27 years old.
. The context for the offences was an 18th birthday party being held for the appellant's younger sister, at their family home. The injured party did not know the appellant or any member of his family but was asked to go along to the party by a friend of hers, who is a relative of the appellant. The party was held in a marquee located at the rear of the appellant's family home, which is in a rural location.
. The details of each of the rapes are more fully set out in the Court's judgment concerning the appellant's unsuccessful appeal against conviction. Suffice to say here that the first rape took place when the injured party and the appellant walked down a road outside the house. The appellant pushed open a farm gate into a field and then pushed her to the ground and proceeded to rape her. They returned to the house after the rape. The injured party said that she was “ roaring crying” but had been threatened by the appellant not to say anything to anyone.
. When they returned to the house, a minibus taking guests away from the party had already left. The injured party was unable to find her handbag, and while she found her phone on a table in the marquee, it was out of power. She asked the appellant to call a taxi for her but he refused. She therefore had no means, in terms of the practical reality of the situation, of leaving the house and going home. Other members of the family, who were downstairs upon their return to the house, went off to bed. The injured party found herself in the sitting room of the house in the company of the appellant for the night. The second rape took place when the appellant approached her from behind, pushed her head down into the sofa and proceeded to have intercourse with her.
. The injured party said she then moved over to a smaller two-seater and sat there, awake, for the remainder of the night (a period she estimated to be four or five hours), while the appellant fell asleep in the same room in a separate armchair. In the morning, his mother came into the room and a taxi was organised for the injured party. She went to her sister's house where she went upstairs for a shower and found that she was bleeding heavily from her vagina.
. The injured party, who was still in school at the time, made a disclosure about the events to one of her former school teachers approximately two days later. However, the matter was not reported to the Gardaí for a period of approximately eight months.
. The appellant was arrested by Gardaí on the 27 September 2016 and interviewed twice in connection with the allegations. He agreed that he met the injured party for the first time on the occasion of the party, and that they spoke and kissed. He also agreed that they spent a period of time away from the curtilage of the house, and that they both spent the night in the small sitting room. He maintained that no sexual intercourse took place between them at any time. This was his defence at trial also.
. In the course of the subsequent sentence hearing following upon his conviction, a victim impact report was put before the court in which the complainant described the adverse effects of the rapes on her school performance and her mental health. As well as suffering anxiety, nightmares, panic attacks and nervousness, the victim suffered from poor concentration, difficulty in trusting others and in her school performance. Physically, she said was bleeding for around a week after the incident, and that she was so sore that she did not want to go to the toilet because it hurt so much. She said that she did not want to shower because she would get flashbacks to when she was had blood on her from the rapes.
. The trial judge passed sentence on the 6 June 2019. She imposed a sentence of 12 years' imprisonment in relation to count No. 1, and 14 years' imprisonment in relation to count No. 2 with the last two years suspended on condition that the accused engage in an appropriate counselling programme in relation to sexual offending as directed by the Probation Service together the further usual conditions. Both sentences were to run concurrently.
. The trial judge included the following observations in her sentencing remarks:
“This was a vicious, horrifying attack by a mature man of 27 years of age on a young girl of 17 years of age. The circumstances of the rapes are particularly sinister. [The injured party] was an outsider at that party that night. She knew nobody except for her friend … who was amongst family. The accused preyed on this. [The injured party] was in a fairly intoxicated state. Whereas whilst he had been drinking, he was serving behind the bar. He used deceit, violence and force to rape her in the field and a greater level of force and violence to viciously rape her for a second time in his family home. It is shocking to think that being inside that fine house where a number of people were, [the complainant] was exposed to as great a level of danger as she had been exposed to in the field resulting in her being subjected to an even more vicious rape.” As to the mitigating factors, the Judge stated as follows:
“In relation to the mitigating factors in this case, there are practically none. The accused ran his case and that cannot be taken into account by me in relation to the sentence that I give. But had he not run his case, that obviously would have been a significant mitigating factor that would have lessoned the sentence of imprisonment that I must impose. That's obviously a matter for Richard O'Mara, but it's important to indicate that it is a matter that would have had a mitigating effect, but it isn't available to him in relation to the matter.
Further, having run his case Richard O'Mara displays no remorse and it has been indicated to me that his instructions that this event did not occur will remain. That obviously has a significance in terms of what happens after I impose sentence. But again if remorse was expressed at this very late stage of the proceedings, it would have been a significant mitigating factor that Richard O'Mara had at last realised the significance of what he had done and had accepted responsibility as a man of 31 years of age at this stage. But he hasn't done so, so again there is no mitigating factor in relation to that.
He is a man of no previous convictions and that's obviously something that I will have account to in terms of his personal circumstances. I'm also told that he is the father to a young child, as I understand the child is 18 months old and that's obviously something that I also will regard to in terms of his personal circumstances and creating a sentence that appropriately meets the vicious and horrendous crimes that were committed in relation to this case, but also having regard to the accused personal circumstances.”
To continue reading
Request your trial