It was a horrific and unnerving case of alleged rape and intimate image abuse that garnered immediate widespread sympathy when raised in the Dáil last February.
Socialist Party TD Ruth Coppinger said an image of the “nude, bruised and unconscious” body of a female University College Dublin (UCD) medical student, allegedly taken in the aftermath of a violent rape, had been sent to the college’s staff and students.
The woman (20s) did not report her claim of rape by an unidentified fellow student, knowing she “would probably not be believed”, said Coppinger. UCD and the woman said they reported the intimate pictures to gardaí.
UCD’s handling of the student’s efforts to progress to her next year of study came under fire from Coppinger, the Dublin Rape Crisis Centre, the National Women’s Council and the college’s students union, among others. More than a thousand people, mainly UCD students, rallied in early March chanting “we stand with her” and calling for systemic change in how the university responds to sexual violence.
READ MORE
Minister for Public Expenditure Jack Chambers called on the university to “work with her so she can complete her studies, because she’s gone through enough”.
The woman herself said: “Being raped was life changing. UCD’s lack of support has been life shattering. To them I feel I am just a PR crisis.”
Now, further details are emerging.
The woman was arrested on suspicion of deceiving UCD in July. She was released without charge while a file is being prepared for the Director of Public Prosecutions.
Gardaí questioned her about the legitimacy of documents furnished to support claims she had been raped and subsequently attended medical appointments around the time she missed some exams in May 2023. Investigators examined seized electronic devices.
The woman did not respond to approaches for comment for this article. UCD declined to comment.
The student’s issues with the university arose early in her first year of study.
Until last week, the woman was locked in a legal battle with UCD. Having lost her High Court bid to be allowed to immediately progress to the next year of study without attending missed classes, she went to the Court of Appeal. However, last Thursday her lawyers said she was withdrawing the appeal.
The High Court judgment dismissing her case sets out the often tense interactions between her and the college from November 2021, when she first sought a meeting to discuss an immediate leave of absence.
According to High Court judge Marguerite Bolger, who sided with UCD on all grounds in her ruling from last December, the student met the chair of the degree programme in February 2022 and discussed her disability and future study.
Bolger said the student missed the majority of her classes in the autumn 2022 term and failed three exams that December. The following February she was appointed a mentor and sent an “academic plan” to catch up on work.
That month she applied for special grades for her three failed modules, saying she had spent most of the autumn term at work or helping her injured mother. She would later allege she was assaulted around this time.
The judgment says her application was rejected in April 2023 on grounds that it was submitted late and because full-time work was not a valid reason for special grades.
She immediately applied again on the same grounds, saying she was “constantly struggling” and suffering “negative emotional wellbeing” due to significant financial pressure. Her application again failed, and she went on to pass just two of eight exams, including some resits, in May 2023.
Several months later she would tell UCD she had to avail of medical services around the time of the exams following an assault.
She was left with six outstanding modules. UCD would later tell the High Court it was very unusual for a student to have so many modules requiring remediation.
The college rejected a third application for exceptional circumstances, which was accompanied by a doctor’s letter which said that the student had been unwell during the exam period but did not outline the nature of her condition.
In July she was told she needed to remediate some of the six outstanding modules before progressing to her next year of study. She declined to follow an academic plan set by the college. A fitness to practice procedure was invoked against her in September 2023, which the college said was aimed at identifying appropriate ways to support her.
That month the college rejected a further application for special grades in which the woman’s GP said it was not policy to state medical conditions on sick notes due to privacy concerns.
In October 2023, the school was told about the nature of the woman’s medical treatment during the May exams. It almost immediately granted her special grades for her six outstanding modules. This meant her grades were not capped and she did not suffer financial penalties.
However, the judge said, the university for “entirely legitimate” reasons said she could not progress to the next year without remediating a sufficient number of failed modules. Despite this, the student tried to register for the next year’s modules, said Bolger.
A series of engagements that followed in the spring of 2024 involved the woman trying to “secure an outcome that she had been repeatedly told was not an option”, the judge said. She rejected the woman’s claims of bias against several staff members.
The woman initiated a discrimination claim before the Workplace Relations Commission in July 2024. Later that month, she issued her High Court case against UCD. Many of her interactions with the university in the lead-up and from this point on were conducted through legal correspondence.
The judge said the woman was offered an opportunity to retake her exams in September 2024, but, for “entirely unconvincing” reasons, did not resit them.
The woman said she became aware in late 2024 of disturbing messages about her on a class online group, including references to her alleged assault. In February 2025, she said, she received an email with images attached.
In April 2025 an alleged photograph of her naked and bruised body was sent to more than 170 academic staff and students from an anonymous, encrypted address. She was contacted by gardaí about the messages.
The woman told The Irish Times earlier this year that she had not known the image existed. Seeing it “shattered” her life, she said.
The college arranged for her to resit her exams in May 2025, but her solicitors said she could not take up the offer and reiterated her wish to engage with module co-ordinators. The judge said the letter did not refer to her being upset by the April email. The woman told the High Court that month was “horrific”.
The intimate image appeared again, in November 2025 and January 2026, in two student group chats. In November it was sent to a 300-member UCD students’ WhatsApp group, accompanied by extremely lewd and disrespectful language about her.
The High Court dismissed the woman’s case last December via an oral ruling. In her follow-up written judgment, the judge said UCD’s solutions to help her complete the failed modules were “entirely lawful and proper”. It was “groundless” for the woman to believe she should not be prevented from progressing to the next year with six incomplete modules, Bolger said.
The woman’s alleged traumatic experiences could not dilute the academic standards required of her or the school’s obligation to determine achievements required to progress, the judge said.
In February, the woman’s claims of rape and intimate image abuse spilt into the wider public domain. So too did her criticisms of UCD’s response to her allegations.
The university publicly described the alleged image-based abuse as “extremely distressing and complex” and said “the needs of our student have been at the centre of the university’s response throughout”.
Initially, due to strict court orders, the High Court ruling vindicating the college’s approach to the woman’s situation could not be linked to her public allegations. However, last March UCD secured an amendment to the orders after submitting that there had been an “explosion” in media coverage about the woman’s claims.
Its lawyers said the institution had received demands from the Student’s Union, the Medical Council, journalists and politicians to explain its actions. It was being “vilified” but could not properly answer the accusations, they said.
The woman told the High Court that UCD, while “focused on its vindication”, had caused “intense speculation and allowed inaccurate narratives to form”. She did not oppose UCD’s request to allow it to be identified in the case.
Her appeal of the High Court’s ruling was heard on July 21st.
As part of the Garda investigation into alleged deception of UCD, the woman was arrested at the Four Courts in Dublin following the hearing of her appeal. She was released and faces no charges.
Last Thursday, the woman’s lawyers told the Court of Appeal their client was withdrawing the case. The court struck out the appeal and made an order providing for the university to have its legal costs covered by the woman.
