A man who repeatedly sexually assaulted his step-daughter in the 1990s has appealed against the imposition of consecutive sentences in his case and has argued that he was effectively “cured” of offending after attending the Granada Institute two decades ago.
Noel Foran (61), of Esker Meadow Rise, Lucan, Co Dublin, was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court last July after he pleaded guilty to three sample counts of 10 sexual assaults that occurred at the family home between March 14th, 1991, and March 13th, 1998.
Foran was sentenced to 18 months on the first and tenth charge with the sentences to run consecutively for the sexual assaults of Irene Cullen, while the other eight sexual assaults were taken into consideration by Judge Orla Crowe.
Ms Cullen waived her right to anonymity so that Foran could be named.
The sentencing court heard that Ms Cullen remembered only one specific incident of abuse that occurred on New Year’s Eve when she was 11.
However, Foran told counsellors he had sexually assaulted his step-daughter approximately 10 times, mostly while the child was asleep, when she was aged between six and 13.
Foran took a trial date but pleaded guilty before his trial began.
Counselling
Kieran Kelly BL, defending, told the court that Foran attended counselling at the Granada Institute in 2004 and told counsellors he had started abusing his step-daughter from when she was six.
The Granada Institute was a treatment centre for child sex abusers that closed down in 2011.
He said he would touch the child’s vagina over and under her clothing, mostly when she was asleep. Foran said it never progressed beyond touching, but added that he would masturbate.
Foran told counsellors at the time of the assaults that he and his wife, Ms Cullen’s mother, were not sexually active and that he “needed comfort and attention”.
At the Court of Appeal on Friday, Mr Kelly said his client did not resile from his guilty pleas, but took issue with the length of the three-year sentence in the imposition of consecutive sentences.
Mr Kelly said a report of the abuse had been made to gardaí in 2002, but a statement of complaint was only made to gardaí in 2017.
Counsel said “everything that could have been done was done to cure the offending”, referring to Foran’s admissions to and engagement with Granada Institute counsellors.
Counsel said the use of two 18-month consecutive sentences could be viewed as “disproportionate or unfair” and, while accepting that it was open to the sentencing judge to do so, they were “commonly deployed in relation to cases where there is one victim”.
Ms Justice Isobel Kennedy said the trial judge could have given Foran a four-year sentence on a single charge, as it was also within the trial judge’s discretion.
'Cured'
Court of Appeal president Mr Justice George Birmingham said the trial judge had the option of consecutive sentences, given there was a “pattern” of offending, or could have sentenced Foran on one single charge which would be aggravated by the other offending.
Mr Kelly said his client was remorseful, lacked previous convictions at the time of sentencing, and noted that a report from the Granada Institute “said that he [Foran] was ‘cured’, for want of a better word”.
Counsel said Foran had been allowed to return to the family home by the time the 2017 complaint revived the matter.
Mr Kelly said “rehabilitation seems to have been accomplished years earlier”, that Foran was judged to be at a “low risk of reoffending”, and that he had not come to any adverse attention since completing his attendance at the institute in 2004.
Diana Stuart BL, for the Director of Public Prosecutions, said the timeline of the case caused Ms Cullen “significant additional distress”.
Ms Cullen was an in-patient who came from hospital that day to attend the court, Ms Stuart said.
Ms Cullen has been hospitalised due to the offending and the distress caused by the events and delays to do with the case, she added.
Ms Stuart said the sentencing judge had it in her discretion to impose consecutive sentences and had given an “extremely considered explanation on why she was imposing consecutive sentences”.
She added it was actually the appellant who had benefited from the length of time between the offending and his sentencing, as he could point to leading a crime-free life in the interim by way of mitigation.
Mr Justice Birmingham said the court would reserve its judgement in the matter.
