A mother has been jailed for the neglect and “vile” sexual abuse of her own toddler son after the Court of Appeal ruled that a fully suspended sentence was unduly lenient.
The court heard that the boy was placed into foster care before he turned five and was found to be unable to use a knife and fork, did not know how to drink from a cup, could not dress himself, and had very poor language skills.
Highlighting the level of neglect and the “gravity and depravity of the sexual acts” inflicted on the boy, Ms Justice Tara Burns on Monday imposed a three-year sentence on the 46-year-old woman, saying that none of this would be suspended as the respondent had failed to show any remorse for her offending.
The Cork native, who cannot be named to protect the identity of the victim, was convicted by a jury in June 2022 of wilful neglect of the child between September 2010 and June 2015, when the boy was between one and four-and-a-half years old.
She was also found guilty of sexual assault and sexual exploitation of the child on a date unknown between September 2013 and June 2015.
She was sentenced by Ms Justice Karen O'Connor to three years on the counts of sexual assault and sexual exploitation and one year on the count of child cruelty, with the sentencing judge suspending the remainder of the sentence following the respondent serving six and a half months for failing to appear on a court date.
The woman, who had pleaded not guilty to the charges, lodged an appeal against her conviction, but this was dismissed in May of this year.
Ms Justice Burns said that the DPP had appealed the woman’s sentence on the grounds that the sentencing court failed to give sufficient weight to the child’s age, the severity of the neglect, the "gravity and depravity of the sexual acts” and the abuse of a position of trust.
'Scant mitigating factors'
The DPP also asserted that the sentencing court attributed excessive weight to “scant mitigating factors”, as well as imposing an overall sentence that constituted a substantial departure from what would have been proportionate.
Ms Justice Burns noted that the woman has a history of mental health difficulties, having been in State care since the age of three, and she has been assessed as having extremely low intellectual functioning.
She said that the sexual offending was of a very serious kind involving a mother offending against her very young son, but while the respondent had a very low intellect, nothing had been placed before the court to suggest she did not understand her actions.
Ms Justice Burns went on to say that the respondent had also vehemently denied she was involved in the offending, which showed she appreciated “the serious and vile nature” of the sexual acts carried out.
As the injured party had been treated in such a manner that he was found to be "devoid of the normal characteristics of civilised human behaviour expected of a child of his age", Ms Justice Burns said that this showed the level of neglect reflected offending of a very serious nature by his mother.
She said the injured party was placed into foster care before he turned five and was found to be unable to use a knife and fork, did not know how to drink from a cup, could not dress himself, and had very poor language skills. He remains in the care of the State.
Ruling that the headline sentence set by the sentencing judge reflected a substantial departure from the norm and was unduly lenient, Ms Justice Burns quashed the sentence and moved on to re-sentencing.
She said the court noted the seriousness of the nature of the offending, the very young age of the injured party, the maternal relationship involved, the breach of trust, the abdication of duty, and the effect on the injured party.
Ms Justice Burns said that a headline sentence of seven years was appropriate for the charges of sexual exploitation and sexual assault, while three years was appropriate for the child cruelty offence.
As the respondent continues to vehemently deny the offending and has shown no remorse, Ms Justice Burns said the level of mitigation appeared limited. However, she noted the respondent’s range of mental health issues and her low intellectual functioning.
Ms Justice Burns imposed three years each on the count of sexual assault and sexual exploitation and one year for child cruelty, with the sentences to run concurrently and to take account of time already spent in prison.
Attitude to offending
She also said that in light of the respondent’s attitude to her offending, a suspensory element of the sentence did not arise.
At the woman's trial, her son described both his parents being present when his mother molested him, forcing him to commit sex acts upon her. The woman did not accept the child was sexually abused and in evidence she named her husband as her own father and claimed that she was conceived in the back of a Garda car.
The child's father, who was the designated primary carer, was charged and prosecuted for more serious sexual offending, but died in custody before he could be brought to trial.
In his victim impact statement, the child said he continued to have nightmares of his parents coming to get him. "When asked about good memories, I end up running to the bathroom crying. When someone calls my name, I get frightened and worried,” he said.
If you have been affected by any of the issues raised in this article, you can call the national 24-hour Rape Crisis Helpline at 1800-77 8888, access text service and webchat options at drcc.ie/services/helpline/ or visit Rape Crisis Help.
