BishopAccountability.org
	Court Grants Appeal to Allow Trial of Priest One in Four [Ireland] March 29, 2007 http://www.oneinfour.org/news/news2007/grants/ The Supreme Court has granted an appeal by the DPP to clear the way for the trial of a Franciscan priest on charges of indecently assaulting a teenage girl who sang in the church choir. The Supreme Court yesterday, by a three to two majority, granted the DPP's appeal against a High Court decision of February 2003 restraining the trial on grounds of blameworthy delay by the prosecution in making important documents available to the defence. The majority court found there was no prosecutorial delay and also held that allegedly important documents produced in 2001 after the first and aborted trial of the priest could be inferred to have been in the possession of the defence just before that first trial. The case arose from alleged events in the 1980s. It was alleged the girl sang in the church choir and was abused by the priest on dates from July 31st, 1981, when she was aged 13, to August 3rd, 1982, when she was aged 15 years. The alleged abuse ended when the girl left the choir and she reported it in 1995. Yesterday's majority Supreme Court judgment was delivered by Mr Justice Nial Fennelly, with whom the Chief Justice, Mr Justice John Murray, and Mrs Justice Susan Denham agreed. The dissenting judgment dismissing the appeal was delivered by Mr Justice Nicholas Kearns, with whom Mr Justice Adrian Hardiman agreed. Mr Justice Fennelly noted that, since the High Court judgment was delivered, the Supreme Court had clarified issues on prosecutorial delay, holding that blameworthy prosecutorial delay would not in itself lead to orders restraining trials. The courts must balance the public interest in prosecuting crimes and the interests of applicants such as the priest, he said. Where it was not established there was a real risk of unfair trial due to delay or loss of evidence, the priest was still entitled to rely on any additional distress he may have suffered due to delay. In this case, the judge said, the prosecutorial delay related to a four-year period from 1998, when the defence solicitors had sought medical reports on the girl, to the initiation in 2002 of this second judicial review challenge by the priest. The first challenge was rejected in 1999. The judge found the priest had failed to establish prosecutorial delay. He also held that no evidence at all had been provided to support the priest's claim that he suffered excessive pre-trial anxiety and said that, on this ground alone, even if there was prosecutorial delay, he would allow the DPP's appeal. The main reason for delay between 1998 and 1999 was the priest's first judicial review, the judge said.
Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.