Supreme Court to consider burden of proof for 'reasonably mistaken' defence in sexual act with person under 17
The State is appealing to the Supreme Court a High Court decision by Ms Justice Siobhán Stack that struck down a subsection of the 2006 Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act as unconstitutional for imposing a legal burden rather than an evidential burden on an accused claiming reasonable mistake as to a child's age. The man in the case was convicted of engaging in a sexual act with a child under 17 and sentenced to one year and 10 months in prison.
- Reportednot reported
- Arrestednot reported
- Chargednot reported
- In court12 Jan
- Verdict
- Sentenced
Key facts
consolidated from all reports9 statements extracted from the articles
- whenThe events giving rise to the trial took place about five years before the article. (irishtimes.com)
- courtThe Supreme Court will consider the legal burden of proof for the 'reasonably mistaken' defence. (irishtimes.com)
- courtThe State is appealing a High Court decision that deemed a section of the 2006 Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act unconstitutional. (irishtimes.com)
- courtThe Minister for Justice, the Attorney General, the DPP, and Ireland were granted a direct appeal to the Supreme Court. (irishtimes.com)
- courtThe ruling in the appeal will affect a number of pending prosecutions. (irishtimes.com)
- sentenceThe man was convicted of engaging in a sexual act with a child under 17 and sentenced to one year and 10 months in prison. (irishtimes.com)
- sentenceThe sentence is being served concurrently with another separate sentence with a release date in 2025. (irishtimes.com)
- otherThe accused was 19 years and four months old at the time of the events. (irishtimes.com)
- otherThe complainant was 15 years and 10 months old at the time of the events. (irishtimes.com)
The reporting
newest first- 12 Jan2023Supreme Court to consider burden of proof for ‘reasonably mistaken’ defence in sexual act with person under 17
Reports that the Supreme Court will hear the State's direct appeal of the High Court ruling, with the case expected to be heard as soon as March 2023 and its outcome affecting a number of pending prosecutions.
convicted, 19, malevictim, 15