A paedophile jailed for 11 years for repeatedly abusing his two granddaughters has appealed his convictions on the grounds of delay and alleged inconsistencies in one of the complaints. He also claims some evidence about how the abuse was disclosed should not have gone before the jury.
In July of last year, Patrick Shanahan (76), of Cooga, Doon, Co Limerick, was convicted by a unanimous jury at Limerick Circuit Criminal Court of 14 counts of sexually assaulting Daria and Tara Tobin between 2010 and 2014.
He had pleaded not guilty to all counts.
Daria and Tara Tobin waived their right to anonymity last year so Shanahan could be named.
Radio: Tempers rise over immigration debate as Matt Cooper scolds warring politicians
‘I want someone to take an actual stand on immigration’: How will TCD student debaters vote?
Spice Village takeaway review: Indian food in south Dublin that will keep you coming back
Trump’s cabinet: who’s been picked, who’s in the running?
The court heard that the abuse involved the rubbing of the girls’ vaginas and later moved on to vaginal penetration by insertion of his finger and tongue when the girls were aged between 10 and 14.
The abuse occurred in the appellant’s own home, on nearby land and property, as well as in his van on local journeys.
At the Court of Appeal on Tuesday, Anthony Sammon for Shanahan said the appeal was based on the time that passed between the offending and the girls’ complaint to their aunt and then to gardaí. Counsel said the appeal was also grounded in the “inconsistency” of one complaint and that questions of a leading or a suggestive nature could have been used by their aunt in making her inquiries.
Counsel submitted that the trial judge erred in fact and in law in permitting the aunt’s evidence to go before a jury, which was objected to by the defence regarding questions posed by her to Tara in 2018 about the offences.
Mr Sammon said the aunt asked Tara: “Is it something to do with Paddy [Shanahan]?” and “You need to tell me what’s going on”. After Tara said it was not to do with her boyfriend or her friends, she confirmed Shanahan was abusing her.
Mr Sammon said that one of the conditions of the admissibility of the evidence of the aunt was that the complaint of sexual offending must be made at the first reasonable opportunity after the commission of the offence.
Mr Sammon submitted that in 2016, two years before the aunt was informed of Shanahan’s abuse, the complainants disclosed to their mother that the appellant was the source of their unhappiness but they did not disclose allegations of a sexual nature and denied that the appellant had touched them inappropriately.
It was submitted that the 2018 complaint, “on any interpretation of the term, could not be the first reasonable opportunity”, said Mr Sammon, who said the two statements of complaint were also inconsistent.
Counsel said the complaint may “not be a voluntary one” if questions of a suggestive or leading character were used” by their aunt.
“If the circumstances indicate that, but for the questioning, there probably would have been no voluntary complaint, the answer is inadmissible,” he said.
Court of Appeal President Mr Justice George Birmingham said the aunt had been “told by the other niece [Daria] ‘I feel I can tell you now’, at which point they drive to her [Tara] and she narrates without really prompting at that stage”.
Mr Justice Birmingham said his reading of the case was that “one complainant directs [the aunt] to go to the other complainant because they are now ready to speak”.
Mr Sammon repeated that what was said to the girls’ mother was inconsistent with what was said to their aunt and pointed out that the time gap was four years.
Lily Buckley, for the State, said there had been difficulties in communication in the family home as the girls’ mother was deaf and that she had given her evidence at trial through a sign-language interpreter.
Ms Buckley said that at the trial, the girls’ mother gave evidence that Tara told her: “Mam, I am going to tell you the truth. Myself and Daria are in danger” but would not elaborate beyond identifying Shanahan as “the problem and what he did to me”.
“Tara wouldn’t tell her anything further. In that, there is the complaint regarding the appellant and that he presented a danger,” said Ms Buckley.
Ms Buckley said the complaint made by Tara to the girls’ mother was consistent with what both girls told their aunt.
“It would have been up to me to carry me and my sister. I went to the gardaí after 18 because I knew I’d be able to do it on my own,” Ms Buckley said, quoting Daria’s evidence. “She felt her parents would not be able to help her,” said counsel of the delay.
“The telling of the aunt is a pivotal step and outside the nuclear family and the assistance of the aunt is there in coming forward,” said counsel, who noted Shanahan was “very much of part of daily life” for the girls.
“With the assistance of the aunt it was possible to take the next step,” said Ms Buckley.
Ms Buckley said an intention had been formed by both girls to disclose the abuse as “the source of the distress” and that Daria had encouraged and created the occasion for the disclosure made by her younger sister. “Tara said she intended and planned to say the complaint,” said Ms Buckley.
Ms Buckley said it had been a “struggle” for the girls to disclose the abuse, “taken the character and vulnerabilities of the complainants, when situated in the family home as they were at the time”.
Mr Justice Birmingham said the court would reserve judgment in the matter.