December 07, 2002
Father sold daughter for sex

These men had sex with a teenager . . . her father sold the girl to them for 'the cost of a pint'

By Helen Bruce and Orlaith Delaney in The Irish Independent

A MAN who sold his mentally impaired teenage daughter for sex for less than the price of a pint will not face prosecution, prompting calls for a change in the law.

Four men were jailed yesterday at the Central Criminal Court in connection with an attack on the girl, but gardai said she had refused to make a complaint against her father.


Senator Joe Costello, Labour spokesman on justice, said the Law Reform Commission should study the details with a view to protecting the vulnerable.


He said: "This is a very disturbing case. If it is the situation whereby the DPP find themselves unable to prosecute because the mentally handicapped person, who is obviously vulnerable, does not feel in a position to press charges, then that is something that should be looked at by the law reform commission. It is serious enough to require a change in the law."


Supt Tony Finnerty said in court that although a file had been sent to the DPP, it directed that the father was not to be prosecuted.


The father, who lives in Co Galway, was said to have received between 75p and £1.50 for handing over the girl to the men.


Mr Justice Paul Carney said he had sold his daughter "for the price of a pint" and handed her to the men involved "on a plate."


The judge sentenced three men who pleaded guilty to having sexual intercourse with the girl and another man, who was convicted of attempting to have sex with her.


Jailed were Owen Maughan (30), Cart na Mara, Portumna, Galway and Christopher Tully (24) of Musside Mews, Derryaghy, Belfast, for three years each. Sean McGuinness (32), St Mary's Road, Galway, who has a previous 12-year conviction for rape, got four years. The final nine months of each sentence was suspended because of the men's guilty pleas. Peter Murray (23), Ballinderry Park, Mayfield, Cork, was given two years for attempting to have sexual intercourse.


Supt Finnerty told prosecuting counsel, Ms Pauline Wally that Maughan told her father he would give him £1.50 if he brought his daughter to a shed. The other three defendants were in the shed.


All were arrested at the scene next day after the girl took gardai there. They said the sexual activity was consensual.

Posted by Colm at December 07, 2002 08:35 AM
Comments

This has made me so angry. If those four men have been found guilty and imprisoned, why does the girl involved need to make a complaint? Everybody knows it happened, so why can the state not take a case against the father? The girl herself is "mentally impaired" and is probably under pressure from her father. I wonder is she still living in the home with him.
If a "mentally impaired" person gets a court settlement involving a lot of money, the person involved is automatically made a ward of court to prevent any family members using the money for their own benefit. The state wants to protect its investment and so no money can be spent without permission from the state. I am so angry. They can step in without a request to protect money, but not to protect a vulnerable girl in this case. What kind of laws have we got? Is there nobody out there with any kind of power willing to make a stand?
I just hope and pray that the girl involved now has somebody in her life to protect her.
I am furious!!!!!!!!

Liz

Posted by: Liz on December 7, 2002 02:01 PM

Ditto feelings Liz...This is one story that I am absolutely raging about and like you I am concerned for her welfare now. Such abject treatment this young woman received disgusts me. The law is an ass. How could she possibly make a complaint given her circumstances?....Oh my blood boils!! G

Posted by: G on December 7, 2002 05:35 PM

Ditto.all the above and yes the law is an ass G. Jesus, is that supposed to be the end of it. Who is protecting this girl now from that psycho..its just not good enough and somone has to be accountable for the decision.

Posted by: T on December 9, 2002 12:05 PM

Why was the DPP directed not to take a case? Was it because the girl was 'mentally impaired'? Another instance that time, education and culture has changed nothing. The DPP has also to be answerable for some of the appalling decisions it has taken in similar cases!

Posted by: Nora B on December 15, 2002 02:24 PM
Post a comment
Name (OPTIONAL):


Email Address (OPTIONAL):


URL (OPTIONAL):


Comments:


Remember info?