A retired Christian Brother has taken High Court proceedings in an attempt to prevent his trial proceeding on charges of sexual assault on three boys in the 1960s.
Mr Justice O Caoimh yesterday granted the 71-year-old former teacher leave to seek an injunction preventing the DPP from prosecuting him on 20 charges of sexual and indecent assault which are alleged to have occurred at a school in the south-east between 1965 and 1968. He has denied the allegations.
The leave was sought by Mr Michael Counihan SC, for the former brother. In an affidavit read by counsel to the court, he said he was 14 when he joined the Christian Brothers. He had qualified as a primary school teacher in the 1950s, after which he had taught at a number of schools. He had retired in the early 1990s.
Mr Counihan contended that his client's right to a fair trial was prejudiced by the delay between the commission of the alleged offences between 1965 and 1968 and the recent institution of proceedings.
The alleged offences had occurred so long ago that it would be practically impossible for the brother to find witnesses to rebut the claims, he said. Counsel also complained of prejudice due to a lack of specificity in the charges.
Counsel said there was another brother in the same school who had meted out violent abuse to boys, and there was a possibility that the complainants may have become confused about the identity of their alleged assailant.
His client was also refuting an allegation that, during a meeting between the brother and one of the complainants in a hotel, the brother had admitted sexual abuse and had asked the complainant not to send him to jail.
Mr Counihan said there was a possibility that the complaints may have been made for financial gain. Solicitors for one complainant had threatened to initiate civil proceedings, seeking damages for alleged sexual assault.
The brother had managed to contact a number of his former pupils and was exhibiting correspondence in which many of those pupils expressed surprise at the allegations and said they had not witnessed any alleged assaults. Mr Counihan said this was important, because it was alleged that assaults had taken place during a particular class.
Counsel said that the circumstances of the alleged indecency were of a more minor nature than those of other cases, and he contended that it might be difficult for the complainants to establish that the level of interference was such as to prevent their making disclosures earlier. One complainant had sought counselling in 1987, but had not made a complaint until several years after.
Mr Justice O Caoimh said he would grant leave to take judicial review proceedings.
