Victim's court anger at rapist's suspended sentence

A rape victim and her family reacted angrily when a four-year suspended sentence was imposed on a Dublin window-cleaner by Mr…

A rape victim and her family reacted angrily when a four-year suspended sentence was imposed on a Dublin window-cleaner by Mr Justice Daniel Herbert at the Central Criminal Court.

John Leech (30) of Castletimon Avenue, Coolock, was convicted by a jury in January last of raping a now 32-year-old woman on December 19th, 1998, in his home some hours after they met in a city-centre disco.

"My daughter has been through hell, and he walks away free?", the victim's mother asked from the body of the court as the suspended sentence was imposed.

"He is not walking away free," Mr Justice Herbert replied before gesturing to his tipstaff (assistant) to ask the distraught members of the family to leave the courtroom.

READ MORE

"I have to point out that \ those who do not understand, through ignorance or otherwise, that a suspended sentence is a real sentence," he added as the rape victim left the court.

Mr Justice Herbert said there was nothing to suggest Leech would be a danger to women in the future.

He also ordered Leech to pay €6,350 to the victim. He said the payments should be made on a €63.36 per week basis "because Mr Leech is a man of very few means." The victim's father told Mr Justice Herbert the family were not interested in money but in justice for their daughter.

Mr Justice Herbert replied that if the family did not want the money, they were welcome to give it to a charity of their choice.

"This is a farce of a court," the woman's father said before he was asked to leave the room by the judge's tipstaff.

Mr Justice Herbert, who heard evidence from Leech's ex-fiancée and mother of his seven-year-old son that Leech was not a violent man, said he had carefully considered all the evidence and had "agonised" over his decision .

However, he said, there was "only one" aggravating factor in the rape while there were several mitigating factors in Leech's favour. The aggravating factor was that Leech had threatened to kill the victim while raping her.

Mr Justice Herbert said although sentences of 17 or 18 years have been passed in "serious rape cases", this was a case which was much less serious. He said this particular case "involved a social evening and permitted sexual intimacy which turned into a rape".

"No actual injury was inflicted on the victim other than the rape," Mr Justice Herbert noted to expressions of disbelief from the victim and members of her family.

He said there were three factors he was taking into consideration in passing the sentence: the punitive, the deterrent and the rehabilitative.

He said: "There's no evidence before me that this man is a threat to women and is likely to offend. In fact, the evidence suggests to the contrary." He said the court should encourage Leech to fully rehabilitate himself. He said Leech was struck by tragedy at a young age when he had a road accident that left him with mental impairment. He was a man who could not read and was barely able to write.

Mr Justice Herbert noted that another tragedy had befallen Leech when his nephew, whom he had been baby-sitting, died of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome in 2001. This was a tragedy which Leech blamed himself for, Mr Justice Herbert noted, referring to psychological reports.

Leech had also tried unsuccessfully to hang himself in 1995. Mr Justice Herbert wished Leech luck before allowing him to go after having sworn to keep the peace for four years.