A 28-YEAR-OLD MAN has had his conviction for the rape of an intoxicated teenage girl quashed, with the Court of Appeal ruling that the trial judge should have given a warning to the jury due to evidence that the complainant told her friends in the immediate aftermath that a different man had sex with her.

At the Court of Appeal today, Mr Justice Patrick McCarthy said the court would quash the conviction as the trial judge had failed to warn the jury of the dangers of convicting after the complainant initially nominated another party as having sex with her and did not refer to the appellant.

The appellant was found guilty of two counts of rape and one count of sexual assault at an apartment on Middle Abbey Street, Dublin 1, on 15 February 2018.

Mr Justice David Keane sentenced him to eight and a half years in prison.

The trial heard that the injured party, who was 17 at the time, travelled to Dublin to attend a concert. While she was waiting outside the venue, she met a male who invited her and her two friends to an apartment, where it was alleged she met the defendant. The group listened to music and drank.

It was alleged that the defendant put a bottle of alcohol to her lips and told her to drink. The complainant alleged that he asked her what she had done sexually and if she had sex with her boyfriend, to which she ‘no’, adding that she was ‘only 17′.

She was fully dressed at this time, she said, but became unable to keep her eyes open or to speak. Her next memory was of being taken to the Emergency Room in an ambulance by her friends. They had returned to the apartment and noticed that her trousers were on inside out. The girl also began to vomit and was unable to stand up. Her friends brought her to the bathroom and then noticed that her underwear was also on incorrectly and stained. She was examined in a sexual assault treatment unit.

In launching an appeal against conviction today, barristers for the appellant, led by Dominic McGinn SC, submitted that the trial judge should have directed the jury to return a verdict of not guilty as there was not sufficient evidence to support a finding beyond reasonable doubt as to the rape charge.

It was submitted that the victim gave evidence of feeling pressure on her vagina and thinking it was the appellant’s penis, but in cross-examination she said that the penetration could have been something other than a penis.

It was further argued that there was a conflict between the evidence of the complainant and witnesses who said she told them a different man had sex with her. The trial heard evidence from a garda that this male admitted to having sexual contact with her. However, the victim denied sexual contact with this male and attributed all wrongdoing to the appellant.

It was further submitted by counsel for the appellant that the victim’s evidence was “vague, inconsistent and contradictory”, due her lack of recollection of what the other male did and a lack of recollection of what she stated to friends.

Another ground of appeal was that the judge’s charge to the jury was not satisfactory, as he failed to give a corroboration warning as to the dangers of convicting due to the conflicting evidence.

In delivering the court’s judgment, Mr Justice Patrick McCarthy said the court was quashing the conviction on one ground of appeal, namely that the trial judge should have given a corroboration warning regarding what the complainant said to her friends in the immediate aftermath of the rape.

Mr Justice McCarthy said that the complainant had given evidence during the trial that she could not recall what she said to third parties in the aftermath. He noted that in the immediate aftermath of the rape, she nominated another party as having sex with her and did not refer to the appellant.

Saying that it was exceptional that there would have been a version of events that nominated another person, Mr Justice McCarthy said the court would quash the conviction.

The appellant was remanded in custody to appear tomorrow before the Central Criminal Court.