[ad_1]
A hospital gardener convicted five years ago of the repeated rape of his wife’s two children may be named for the first time this week after the lifting of a gagging court order.
In 2015 Paul Gregory (56) of Lucky Brook House, Cronroe, Ashford, Co Wicklow pleaded guilty to 205 counts of rape and sexual assault of his wife’s two children at their Co Wicklow home. The victims were under 10 years old when the abuse began in 1993, and the attacks continued for a decade.
Gregory had previously worked as a gardener at Newcastle Psychiatric Hospital and was suspended when the allegations emerged.
One victim said at his trial in the Central Criminal Court that he felt he had been abused “millions of times.”
In March 2016, Judge Tony Hunt imposed a prison term of 21 years, with suspension for the last five years.
In that ruling, the victims, who are now adults, told the court that they wanted to waive their legal anonymity so that their stepfather could be publicly named. However, Judge Hunt suspended the waiver of anonymity to prevent the publication of anything that could prejudice the trials that were to take place in the Wicklow Circuit Criminal Court.
Both cases had been completed last June and the Director of the Public Prosecutor’s Office (DPP) submitted a request to the judge to lift this suspension so that Gregory could be identified.
Several court appearances followed and Gregory changed his legal team at one point. At a hearing, DPP’s Paul Murray SC suggested that Gregory was using delaying tactics.
At another hearing, Gregory told Judge Hunt that he would be in danger if his identity was released. He said he did not think it would “be the best” for him at this time and said he is currently in therapy.
Judge Hunt told him on that occasion that the anonymity and any waiver thereof was there to benefit the victims.
In a subsequent hearing Patrick Gageby SC, defending, told the judge that the decision of the Court of Appeals in a lawsuit by RTÉ and others against a Superior Court order that prevents the identification of a woman who killed her child may have some relevance for your client.
He said that if the Court of Appeal holds that Article 252 of the Juvenile Law “survives the death of the child,” it could lead to an interpretation of the law that also prevents the identification of victims of child abuse. This would prevent Gregory from being named because of the family connection.
The subsequent Court of Appeal did in fact interpret section 252 as an extension beyond the death or “aging” of child victims, but Judge Hunt said the section still allowed the court to waive the reporting prohibition when the court “He is convinced that it is appropriate to do so in the interests of the child.”
The DPP’s Mr. Murray SC told the court that the two complainants had again confirmed that they were aware that they would be identifiable if the convicted person was named and “are absolutely willing to submit to that.
“They were silent for so many years and now they want the curtains to go up,” he said.
Judge Hunt said he was satisfied that it should lift these recently imposed prohibitions by the interpretation of section 252.
He said that “the act of a victim to speak publicly about their experiences can help the victim to recover from the effects of the crime” and can also encourage others in their position to come forward.
Consequently, it issued an order lifting all information restrictions in the case, saying it considered this to be “in the public interest.” But he placed a 28-day suspension on his order pending a request from the defendant to the Court of Appeal.
No such appeal has been made and that deadline has passed, meaning that Gregory can now be identified.
In his November ruling, Judge Hunt said that, following the Court of Appeal ruling, there is now a question whether section 252 “is adequate for the purported purpose. . . in the case of deceased children ”.
“Any such difficulty is undoubtedly capable of quick and easy resolution in the appropriate forum,” he said.
[ad_2]