Published: Thursday, 18th March, 2010 12:00pm

Judge discharges jury in sex abuse trial

Judge John O'Hagan discharged the jury in a sexual assault case being heard at Cavan Circuit Court because evidence, which emerged at the hearing relating to the existence of a message on a mobile phone belonging to the defendant, wasn't contained in the book of evidence prepared for the case.

The judge said that the defence could justifiably claim that they were being prejudiced by this factor. Stating that the case would have to be reheard by a different jury, he thanked the nine women and three men for having listened to the evidence over the two-day trial.

A County Cavan man was being tried on 16 charges of sexual assault of two girls in the years 2003, 2004 and 2005 when they were aged eleven and twelve years. Nine of the charges related to the sexual assault of one of the girls and six charges related to the assault of the other.

The defendant pleaded not guilty to the assaults, which it was claimed were committed by the accused man when he asked the girls to tidy up either his house or apartment.

Monica Lalor, BL, instructed by Rory Hayden, State Solicitor, prosecuted on behalf of the Director of Public Prosecutions; while Mr. Patrick O'Connell, SC, Mr. Padraig McNamee, BL, instructed by Alma Crossan, solicitor, represented the defendant.

Both girl complainants and their mother and sister had given evidence in the case when the judge halted the trial.

Prior to the judge stopping the trial; the girls, under examination by Ms Lalor, outlined the alleged assaults. They claimed that after the defendant committed the assaults he told them not to tell anyone or they would all get into trouble.

Mr. O'Connell put it to the complainants that their claims of sexual assault were a total fabrication, which the defendant would strongly deny. The girls rejected Mr. O'Connell's contention. They knew what the defendant had done to them, they said.

During her evidence, the girls' mother said that her daughters complained to her on April 9, 2005 and she spoke with the defendant on April 10. When she and her husband called to the defendant's house, he was looking for his mobile phone. Witness said that she had possession of the defendant's mobile phone; she had it for a reason. When she told the defendant that she had his phone, he said: "I didn't do anything." She went to the police on Tuesday, April 12.

Evidence was also given by the girls' sister. She agreed with Mr. O'Connell that she too made a complaint against the defendant but then withdrew it. Asked by Mr. O'Connell why she subsequently moved into the defendant's house and lived with him, witness replied that she only rented a room off the defendant. She recalled that she saw the defendant's phone sitting on a couch and she lifted it and read a message sent to her sister. Her mother later took possession of this phone.

Judge O'Hagan stated that the mobile was a very significant piece of evidence, which wasn't in the book of evidence. Its introduction in evidence could give rise to the defence feeling that they were being ambushed.

"I am discharging this jury and you can fight another day," said the judge.