Cork jury finds man not guilty of rape and sexual assault after 'Twelve Pubs of Christmas' night

‘Twelve pubs of Christmas’ celebrations were taking place in Cork city on a night when a young woman alleged that she was raped and sexually assaulted after going home to a man’s house when she was too drunk to consent to sex.

Today, after six hours of deliberations, a jury of seven men and five women told Ms Justice Siobhán Lankford that they had reached majority 'not guilty' verdicts on all charges – one of rape and five of sexual assault, and that at least ten of them agreed. 

The complainant joined his hands in gratitude to the jury at the Central Criminal Court in Cork as they stood to leave and he then burst into tears. The complainant was not present at that time.

The accused, who is aged around 40, testified that the sexual acts were consensual. He explained that when first questioned by gardaí he denied any sexual encounter because he said his girlfriend did not know of his ‘infidelity’ on the night back in December 2022 and still did not know.

Prosecution barrister Ray Boland said: “He can no longer brazen it out because the DNA shows his semen in her vagina. He then explains – ‘I didn’t want my girlfriend to find out’.

“Before that he had legal advice – before his first interview and before his second interview – but he brazens it out."

“He knew this girl was too drunk to consent, and did not consent. He was anxious to get her out of his house afterwards as she was sobering up. He did not want her to know where he lived or who he was.

“She (the complainant) is very straightforward, very agreeable, very suggestible. When suggested to her, ‘you performed oral sex on him’, her reply is: ‘Maybe I did’. She has huge blanks because of her drunkenness and says she was too drunk to consent to any of this.

“He chose to give evidence in the trial… When you look at his evidence he is evasive, self-serving, tactical. When he is giving answers he is considering, 'does this look good for me or bad for me?' ... I am suggesting he is not believable and she is believable.

“I say the state has proved the case beyond reasonable doubt on the charges – there was no consent to these activities. On the evidence you should convict him.” 

 Defence senior counsel Jane Hyland said: “There are many many doubts you should have when you are considering the evidence against him.

“Both parties had drink on them in the early hours of this morning in December 2022. Both of them had been drinking throughout the day. She says she was very drunk. Sexual intercourse and sexual contact is not an issue. 

"What is actually the issue is that the state says she was not consenting at the time of these acts, and that he knew she was not consenting or was reckless as to whether she was consenting.

“There are many, many reasons why you should take the view that he thought she was consenting. She says: ‘I was incredibly drunk, I was heavily crying, I was hyperventilating, I was falling around.’ 

"You have CCTV, look at the CCTV… She walks relatively easily, she walks into a shop. He walks behind her. Where is the hyperventilating? Where is the falling down? Where is the crying heavily? She appears to be chatting easily to (the defendant), hand in hand, side by side. They are both relaxed, she is smiling… 

"You see a kiss and an embrace and it lasts 13 or 14 seconds, her arms are around his neck. She is an enthusiastic participant.” 

Ms Hyland said that this was in contrast to the state depicting him as a sexual predator looking for a young woman falling around on the street.

Ms Hyland quoted from answers given by the complainant under cross-examination, where she said of the sexual acts between the parties: “I think there was an understanding – this is what is supposed to happen, this is what is expected.” 

Ms Hyland asked the jury to consider, “What does that mean?” 

Ms Hyland also asked them to consider that by her own evidence, the complainant never said, ‘No’, that she “may have taken off her own clothes”, and that she may have been on top of the defendant at one period, and she then asked the jury, “How does he know she does not consent to that? How could he be guilty of being reckless as to whether she consented? Look at all the signals – how can he possibly know there is no consent?” 

Ms Hyland concluded her address to the jury saying they could only conclude that there was consent. 

“The fact of infidelity does not make the man a rapist,” she said.

- If you are affected by any of the issues raised in this article, please click here for a list of support services.