A DEAF AND vulnerable woman who was sexually abused for years by several of her male relatives says she “now feels free” after years of being trapped and controlled by her family.

Four of seven of the woman’s family members were convicted last month of a combined total of 13 counts of abusing her following an eight-month trial in the Central Criminal Court. They are her uncle and three younger half brothers.

One of the convicted brothers is on the run, with the court hearing gardaí have no information as to his current whereabouts. He was on bail throughout the trial and after the jury handed down the first guilty verdicts against him last month.

A warrant was issued for his arrest when he failed to appear in court for the remainder of the verdicts.

The proceedings sat for 131 days, making it the longest running criminal trial in the history of the State. The jury deliberated for two weeks.

They were unable to agree on verdicts about two other uncles who stood trial and the two rape charges against these men (Accused A and Accused G) were withdrawn by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) on Monday.

Charges against a fourth brother (Accused D, age 34) were withdrawn during the trial after the prosecution evidence.

The men who were convicted are the woman’s 49-year-old uncle (Accused B), her 35-year-old brother (Accused C) and her two 33-year-old brothers (Accused E and F).

Accused C is the brother who broke his bail conditions and his sentence hearing was unable to proceed in his absence on Monday.

The abuse took place over an 11-year period on dates between 2003 and 2014 when the complainant was aged between 15 and 26-year-old. It occurred in various locations including the family home and her grandparents’ home.

The court heard the woman is profoundly deaf and suffers from severe language deprivation, in part because she was not taught Irish Sign Language until later in her childhood.

A sign language expert previously told the court that this language deprivation led to an absence of learning and a reduced understanding of how the world works.

She told the court a toddler growing up will always ask ‘why’ but that this complainant “had nobody to explain why” and so “had no way to understand how the world works” as she grew up.

The family was dysfunctional and fractured, with the father constantly drinking and regularly violent towards the children’s mother and some of the children themselves.

The woman had limited means of communicating with her family and would use ‘home sign’ or write messages on her phone.

The court heard she would use her phone to type ‘no’ to her brothers and uncle as they abused her.

In her victim impact statement, the woman said that when she was a child, she “dreamed that Tusla would take (her) away” and that she would be given a “new mother and father”.

“I would feel safe with a new family. I think that if I was taken away, I would have had more support.”

She said she only felt safe in her grandfather’s company and at school. “I felt trapped by my family. They all controlled me.”

In the statement, read to the court by Roisin Lacey SC, prosecuting, the woman said she always felt anxious, nervous and unable to relax in the family home.

She said she remembered not feeling safe from a young age and wearing dark clothes “to cover my body, because of what my brothers and uncle did to me”.

“I think my brothers and my uncle passed me around… They just wanted me for sex.”

“My body was broken, damaged. My heart was broken because of what happened.”

The woman said she experienced suicidal ideation but stopped herself from taking her own life.

“I knew there was a better life for me, I just needed to escape.”

She said her life changed after she moved away and that her partner makes her feel safe, and “took away the feeling of helplessness”.

The woman said her quality of life was “bad” during the “really long” trial and that she experienced flashbacks.

She thanked the interpreters, gardaí, the judge, victim support, barristers and all who supported her throughout the process.

“I want you to know that I now feel free after many years, feeling happy, relaxed and that I can talk,” she said. “I was helpless until all your help and support. Nothing helped. Everything was a barrier. I feel helped now.”

Prosecution counsel handed in a psychological report on behalf of the woman, outlining that she has suffered complex PTSD as a result of the abuse and detailing a prognosis of her future mental health.

The deaf woman’s uncle, Accused B, was convicted of three counts of rape and one count of anally raping her over an eight-year period between 2006 and 2014 when she was aged between 18 and 26.

Accused E was found guilty of two counts of anally raping his deaf sister on dates between 2007 and 2009 while Accused F was convicted of a single count of raping her during the same time period. They were aged between 14 and 16 years old at the time, and she was aged between 18 and 20.

The DPP placed Accused B’s offending in the more serious category with a recommended 10 to 15 years headline sentence. Accused E and F have been placed in the ordinary category with a headline sentence of seven years, the court heard.

Defence counsel said psychological reports have been ordered for Accused E and F but will not be ready until October. Pleas of mitigation in defence of all three men will be heard at a further sentence hearing on 19 October.

In relation to Accused C, he was convicted of all 10 charges against him involving both the main complainant and two other sisters.

He was convicted of three counts of rape, two counts of anal rape and one count of sexually assaulting his deaf older sister over a seven-year period between 2003 and 2010.

He was aged between 12 and 19, and she was aged between 15 and 22.

This relative was also convicted of anally raping one younger sister on a date between 2010 and 2014 and two counts of rape and one count of sexually assaulting a third sister on different occasions between 2005 and 2018.

Defence barrister, Suzanne Dooner BL, told the court they have “no idea where he is”. Ms Justice Biggs said it would be unconstitutional for the court to sentence the man in his absence “notwithstanding his decision to leave – possibly the jurisdiction”.