A judge has praised a survivor of sexual abuse for speaking out and leading the way for others to come forward.
A now 37-year-old Tipperary man, who was 13 years old when he began sexually abusing the then four-year-old victim, was on Friday jailed for five years for the offences.
The accused man, who cannot be identified to protect the identity of the injured party, pleaded guilty to oral rape and sexual assault of the young man at the victim’s home on dates between 1999 and 2002.
The boy was between four and eight years old when he was abused by the accused in the bathroom of the young boy’s family home. The accused was aged between 13 and 17 years old during his offending.
Jury begins considering verdict in woman’s civil action alleging rape by Conor McGregor
Gym owner who sued claiming he might never fly again after being trapped in lift flew to Rome to propose to partner
Boy scarred after tripping over football in Lidl middle aisle settles case for €30,000
Woman ordered to pay HSE’s legal costs after claim of delayed breast cancer diagnosis successfully defended
In his victim impact statement, the now 28-year-old man told the court that the accused had taken his childhood and groomed him for his own sexual gratification. He outlined the adverse effects the abuse has had and continues to have on his personal life, education and relationships.
He outlined how he had suffered depression, stress, anxiety, sadness, fear, nightmares and paranoid thoughts towards other people. He said he had “agonised” over disclosing what had happened to him and was afraid about how he would protect any future children.
Ms Justice Mary Ellen Ring noted during sentencing on Friday that the injured party had carried the burden of deciding whether to disclose what had happened to him.
“No person – a child, adolescent or adult – should ever have that burden,” she said, “what was done was not only wrong, it was criminal”. She said that in reporting his abuse, the man was leading the way for others to take the same step and break the silence. “There should be no shame,” she said.
She noted that the accused man had pleaded guilty but said it came at a late stage. She said the injured party had understood for a period of two years, until late 2022, that he would be required to give evidence causing stress and anxiety she could not overlook.
Ms Justice Ring said the court must give regard to the fact that the accused man was himself a child when the offending occurred. She said the court had no understanding or explanation of how he came to carry out such abuse.
She said that whatever the lack of maturity of a 13-year-old, he knew he was abusing a very young child, and that realisation had to grow as he matured.
She noted that the accused man had not engaged with the Probation Service in relation to a court-ordered report, and there was consequently no risk assessment or recommendations to assist in sentencing.
She said he had abused the trust of the injured party and the child’s family but noted the lack of any similar offending in the intervening years. She noted he had worked to provide for his family.
Ms Justice Ring imposed concurrent sentencing totalling five years. She ordered 18 months of post-release supervision.
She wished the injured party and his family well and hoped he and his family could move on.
A local garda told Patrick McGrath SC, prosecuting, that the accused and the injured party had been neighbours, and the accused was a frequent visitor to the boy’s home, almost on a daily basis.
The abuse ended following an incident at the injured party’s home unrelated to the abuse, and the accused was no longer welcome at the house.
The injured party later told a girlfriend in 2017 what had happened, and he made a statement to the Garda in 2018. The accused was interviewed a number of times in 2019 and made some admissions.
He told gardaí he was hanging his head in shame, that it was not a right thing to do and he was disgusted with himself. The case was listed for trial and he entered guilty pleas in 2022.
Seamus Clarke SC, defending, asked the court to take into account his client’s guilty plea and lack of relevant convictions. He submitted that the court should factor in the discount in sentencing mandated by law as the accused was a child himself when the offences occurred.