The sentencing last week of Stephen “Rossi” Walsh for the sexual assault of a seven-year-old girl some 20 years ago is simply one of the dozens of crimes against women that pass through the Central Criminal Court each year.
62-year-old Dubliner, Walsh hit the headlines because of his long and glittering career as a criminal and arsonist. This week, the papers pointed out that this was the man who won prisoners the right to vote from jail, picking over the juicy details of a long and varied career as a manipulative thug. He received 15 years in 1993 for torching a pub but this week he received a mere three for simulating sex on a little girl. During the trial last month, he actually handled the cross-examination of his victim himself, asking her why it had taken her so long to come forward.
He’s already serving a 10-year sentence for the rape of a 9-year-old girl in the 1990s.
His case makes me angry, but sadly it’s not particularly unusual. Every day the Central Criminal Court deals with similar trials. Working there, you see a constant procession of crimes against women – murder, rape, abuse. The official figures might show a drop in rape trials passing through the courts, but it’s hard to see that on the ground. In the court list for this Monday – which includes both trials due to start and cases that have not yet come to trial but need to be raised before the judge for any number of reasons – nine out of 12 cases are crimes against women.
Most of these cases will not be reported. Rapes do not make headline-grabbing copy. Both accused and alleged victim have the right to anonymity until a verdict, so any reports must take care not to identify either. In practice, this means being vague about locations and using a lot of pronouns. When the case is one of incest, then the accused cannot be identified even after conviction, for the sake of his victims. This is only right, but as a journalist I can see the value in naming and shaming. I genuinely think that the public has a right to see the faces of these dangerous men and to see what they are capable of.
I can understand the view of victims who want to move on with their lives and would like to forget what happened to them; who would rather the case sank into obscurity. The French student viciously raped by murderer Gerald Barry made a strong case in her victim impact statement against the media coverage her case would receive. But less than two months after he had raped her, Barry had gone on to kill, and possibly also sexually assault, Swiss language student Manuela Riedo. The likes of Gerald Barry and Larry Murphy may generate hysterical headlines but there are other cases that can never be reported. Men just as vicious, just as brutal, just as manipulative and dangerous, who will never be known.
Covering the Central Criminal Court, you see the shattered lives of numerous women. The childhoods crushed and blighted, the fumbling, terrifying attacks, false imprisonment, manipulation, men who think of women as a lesser species. In the worst cases we hear of lives snuffed out. Husbands unable to deal with the breakdown of a relationship or unable to cope with a strong woman as a wife after a coddled youth. Men unable to let go. Even when it’s a woman in the dock, the story is often of a wife striking out after years of abuse. The courts give you an in-depth view of the darker side of the relationships and a real sense of how much further there is to go for women in this country.
When sentences for rape are generally less than a decade and abuse cases usually end with sentences of less than half that, it’s no wonder violence against women doesn’t show any real sign of letting up. According to the Rape Crisis Centre, a tiny proportion of rapes ever make it to court and it’s not hard to see why. Stephen Walsh’s questioning of his victim was unusual, but there would be nothing to stop it happening again. Until the moment the accused is convicted, he is an innocent man in the eyes of the law and perfectly entitled to act in his own defence.
As we’ve seen in the case of Dan Foley from Listowel, who had his hand shaken by dozens of men as he awaited a sentence for the rape of a local woman, even public attitudes can be shockingly biased against the victim. It takes a very brave woman to take the stand in a rape case, but thank goodness some do.
When their attacker is subsequently handed a sentence less than five years, few women feel it’s worth all the pain. Stephen Walsh got 15 years for arson, for destroying the bricks and mortar of a pub. For destroying the childhoods of his two victims he got a total of 13 years. Drug offences can carry a minimum sentence of 15 years, but rape can result in a suspended sentence. Judges here cannot even opt to run sentences consecutively if they relate to the same series of charges. The maximum the convicted man will serve is the longest sentence handed down. Then every prisoner in an Irish jail has an automatic right to a quarter off their sentence. A carrot to ensure good behaviour in jail, but surely not one that’s appropriate in every case. When he was sentencing Gerald Barry, Mr. Justice Paul Carney pointed out that there are some who do not deserve this light at the end of the tunnel, but he was not in a position to do anything about it.
Judges often make comments about the lengths of sentences they are permitted to impose, but nothing ever seems to change. Until the Government introduces a sentencing structure for sex crimes that is a proper deterrent, it’s unlikely things will improve. There are more female barristers graduating every year and the media based full-time in the courts are predominately women. It’s a shame that the system doesn’t show equal evolution and start treating crimes against women as seriously as they should be treated. Surely we’ve come that far?
Excellent article, Abigail. What I wonder is what it will take to change the system and the sentencing guidelines for rape? Is there anything we, as a collective, can do to change this system? The fact that the victim is also put on trial in a rape case is heinous and perhaps it is time for Ireland to look to other countries who do a better job of sentencing and making it easier for women to report rape.
Some of this comes down to the fact that in our society females are still not seen as important as males and it will probably take a long and big shift in this area to change deeply embedded attitudes. However, that said, if the legal system made it clear that women were valued as much as the bricks and mortar of a pub, at the very least, then perhaps the whole of society might see females in a different light. It has to start somewhere, why not in the legal system.
I was raped in the last 1970s, something I rarely speak of, and, at that time, there was no way in hell I was going to report it because I knew my background would be raked over and I would have to endure as bad as the rape itself. So I said nothing and it took years to heal the emotional wounds of that experience. It makes me very sad to know that it is still like this in Ireland, over 30 years later.
I’ve never understood why those in rape and sexual assault cases who argue that there was consent aren’t charged with perjury once convicted of the assault, after they have lied to the court about there being consent.
Here’s a new idea, instead of sentence reductions for pleading guilty, how about sentences that are increased by a third for pleading non-guilty when you are in fact guilty.
Also sentences must be consecutive in this cases not concurrent, as it stand it would appear that if you raped someone and beat them in the hope that they would be too intimidated afterwards to bring it to court then you’re no worse off sentencing wise than the rape on its own.
And we should end all unearned remission for crimes against the person, if you attend counselling and genuinely engage with the services then perhaps remission can be there as an incentive but the current set up is wrong.
I don’t think any provisions for sentence reductions about first offences or character witnesses, John was a good footballer and captain of the team etc, should be allowed either. In fact if you, as a priest or team coach or whatever, give a character witness for someone convicted of these sort of crimes then your credibility as a character witness in future cases should be known to that future case.
Great post Abigail. I agree with Maya and Daniel above, the first article I ever wrote [for Big Issues] was on this exact subject. Sentences for rape here are one of the lowest in Europe. ‘Rossi’ got 15 years for torching a pub back then but only three for simulating sex on a little girl because in Ireland we care more about property than children/people.
I, like a lot of ordinary people I suspect, first came across this bizarre attitude to assaults compared to property crime at the time of the Ealing Vicarage assaults where greater sentences were handed down for the burglary that the rape. It all appears to stem from the time when property was in the hands of the few, and the judiciary to protect the establishment against the far greater numbers of the great unwashed imposed harsh sentences to keep them at bay.
the whole issue was set back by the FF/PD Emergency Laws
in 2006 (amended 2007) Criminal laws (Sexual Offences)
Nothing changed , absolutely nothing , including families
having to sit near perpetrators in the courts. Despite
Ciarán Cuffe reading the protest of the Ombudsman
for Children into the debate (re : section 5)
In fact I think that I can trace my personal dismay at the
government parties to that day, cos I was at the debate
and
i). Not one woman spoke in the Dáil
ii). We possibly require a constitutional Referendum on
Section 5 of the Act.
iii). The ‘opposition’ at the time did not request adequate
amendments and cos the clauses were denied, there
has been no re-visit to the Statute.
Why now, should women and indeed all victims of rape
have confidence in their Dáil as anything approaching
representative on Criminal Justice issues ?
Christine, that bill was debated up to the wire of the Dail winding up, the government was guillotining the Bill and the opposition spokespersons got copies of it 20 minutes before McDowell rose in the chamber to introduce it. How quick do you think they could draft amendments to legislation that had minimal sight of?
The opposition (not sure why you place that word in brackets) simply weren’t given time to speak much beyond the respective spokespeople at the time.
That Bill was a mess and I agreed with Cuffe’s argument that there should be a sunset clause on it to ensure that it was revisited and drafted properly. But to blame the opposition because amendments were not properly taken or more opinion sought from the benches is just wrong.
Going off topic but I’m inclined towards the idea of getting rid of a fixed age of consent and simply use the maxim of half your age plus 7 as the age of consent boundary where we’re looking at protecting minors from predators. I’m not sure that a law that automatically criminalises 15 year old boys who have sex with girls their own age does society any good. I don’t think they should be having sex at that age but some things are not best dealt with just by making laws about it.
Christine, that bill was debated up to the wire of the Dail winding up, the government was guillotining the Bill and the opposition spokespersons got copies of it 20 minutes before McDowell rose in the chamber to introduce it. How quick do you think they could draft amendments to legislation that had minimal sight of?
Like I said , Daniel – I know I attended the debate as a guest.
And in the light of that I would hope that any emergency Bills and legislations
that are in future debated in the Dáil are properly communicated to all parties,
because that almighty mess is still ongoing for victims.
Is that clear enough ?
No women at that time held the ‘relevant portfolios and thus did not speak
on the criminal justice approach to violent sex-crime.
BTW have you forgotten that girls are criminalised also
except for penetrative sex ? funny how pundits and hacks
ignore that in their fight for rights.
I seem to recall Brendan Howlin giving a very concise but accurate critique of the bill showing how it was inconsistent and as you say criminalised some sexual activity only if it didn’t lead on to other activity and that there are gender distinctions for various acts. Bonkers stuff all in all.
what worries me is that at the time only the Irish Times
really covered the issues there, a significant amount
of the populace do not know some of the legislations
that are actually on the statute!
I think that the onus is on the opposition parties
to use the press more effectively (and their blogs)
to discuss how these laws effect people – because
there is huge letdown out there when confronted with
these laws through our courts.
I (for one) am tired of Political platforming and want to
see information on every frickin’ scrap of legislation at
this point, along with simple dispassionate debate
on how one is effected.
also the conviction rates are abysmal
The press control what it is that they choose to write about, this notion that it’s primarily the opposition’s fault is for not getting their side across misses that fact. As for blogs, let’s face it every member of the opposition could be blogging and to what end? An article in a local paper will be read by more people than most blogs in Ireland, sure every once in a while a piece might be picked up the the national press but it is only when the national press pick up on it that it gets any major attention at all.
Sure you might read it and so might I but who are we? Two voters out of millions. Political change in a democracy is about changing the minds of large numbers of people not a select few. I think blogging and expression on-line has a role to play in the public discourse but people who think that each and every blog post is going to change the world need to met more people from a wider background.
I’m not sure what you mean by political platforming, but if you want things to change then that means dealing with other people, large numbers of them who might agree with most of your views but not all of them. And you have to be able to either convince them to change to match with your views or compromise on some things to get others.
the 2006 act was shoved through the Dáil with amazing rapidity altogether by all parties, sure the Séanad clapped.
what parliament does that ?
Two clauses were suggested by Greens and denied, still
went through
‘I will not prevent the passage of this legislation through the house’ (being the resounding crap from the Opposition)
A parliament that was going on its holiday and for which the schedule is controlled by the ruling party.
[...] written a post over on The Anti-Room blog on the subject of sentencing for sex crimes. It’s an important [...]
“The press control what it is that they choose to write about, this notion that it’s primarily the opposition’s fault is for not getting their side across misses that fact. As for blogs, let’s face it every member of the opposition could be blogging and to what end? An article in a local paper will be read by more people than most blogs in Ireland, sure every once in a while a piece might be picked up the the national press but it is only when the national press pick up on it that it gets any major attention at all.”
I do know that Joe Duffy and his ilk added to the
hysteria, the press seems to think that manipulation
is more important than fact!
The issue , however is how the ramifications of undebated
law effect the people, in this case the victim who imo
is done a disservice through ill-representation. The NGOs
are crucial in ensuring adequate info and have more
expertise than some of our public reps.
[...] attack by a man on a woman. I’ve written about my views on sentencing both here and on the Antiroom blog. It’s always shocking when you look at the court lists for the Central and see the number [...]