THE prosecution of a man charged with indecently assaulting his daughter should go ahead and it was a matter for the district Judge whether to send him forward for trial, the High Court ruled yesterday.
Mr Justice Barron said the charge arose from two formal complaints by the man's daughter in 1994. He was interviewed after the first complaint and, following the second, was arrested.
A summons charging him with the offence was applied for and was returnable to the district court. The matter was listed for February 1996 but in January, the man was given liberty to apply for an order of prohibition.
The daughter told a school counsellor about the alleged sexual assault in 1988 and complained that the man had sexually assaulted her the previous year.
A report was sent to the local health board suggesting the man and his wife attend a meeting.
At the meeting the man admitted what was alleged. It was decided the matter should be referred to a clinical psychologist. The couple attended one meeting. It was submitted the man thought she would not be prosecuted.
It was several months before the health board fixed another appointment and then having heard an admission, another four months before treatment began. The gardai, after an initial attempt to obtain a statement, took no further steps. Seven years went by before a formal complaint was made.
The man submitted that the gardai were aware he was being compelled to attend counselling and that the State could not now say that it was still entitled to mount a prosecution. The judge said this submission must be rejected.