Father imposed a "sexual tariff" before allowing daughters go out

A 40 YEAR OLD father who imposed a "sexual tariff" on his three daughters, forcing them to have sex with him in return for permission…

A 40 YEAR OLD father who imposed a "sexual tariff" on his three daughters, forcing them to have sex with him in return for permission to leave the house to socialise, is to be sentenced on January 24th next.

The incest offences, which spanned a seven year period, had been described in the Central Criminal Court as "one of the worst cases of its kind ever".

Mr Patrick MacEntee SC, defending, said two of the defendant's daughters could see it in their hearts to forgive his abuse. The third daughter was finding it more difficult, but had visited him in prison after Christmas.

The unemployed Dublin man was remanded in continuing custody after he pleaded guilty to 10 representative counts of rape, incest and indecent assault out of an original indictment of over 250 charges.

READ MORE

The offences against his daughters, now aged 18, 20 and 21, were committed between 1989 and February 1996. The abuse involved kissing, fondling, oral sex masturbation and sexual intercourse.

In evidence, the defendant's wife said she was standing by her husband and would have him back despite everything as she felt her daughters could be protected in the future.

In other aspects of family life her husband had been a kind man and a good provider when he could, she said.

Mr Justice Carney interjected, saying: "This flies in the face of the evidence to date. The evidence is that as soon as his wife was out of the house, doing the difficult job as a cleaner, he was idling at home raping his daughters."

Earlier, Det Garda Roisin Connolly agreed with Mr Justice Carney that the defendant imposed a "sexual tariff" on the social life of his daughters.

His wife was unaware of the abuse as the incidents were committed while she was out working or visiting a relative.

He initially began to take a sexual interest in his eldest daughter during March 1989 when she was 14. The abuse gradually progressed to full intercourse.

She left the family home in July 1995 and moved to a flat, but the abuse continued. He last had sex with her in the family home in September 1995 and sexually assaulted her for the last time two months after that, Det Garda Connolly told prosecution counsel Mr Paul O'Higgins SC.

The defendant also took a sexual interest in his second daughter during 1989, when she was 13. Hem turned to his youngest daughter in January 1994 and in September of that year began to have sex with her.

He raped the girls two to three times a week and also showed them pornographic videos and magazines during some of the abuse sessions.

Det Garda Connolly said the abuse only came to light when the youngest daughter left the family home in February 1996 and refused to return there.

When confronted by his wife the defendant admitted the abuse before leaving the house abruptly. Later that night he walked into Store Street Garda station and confessed.

He apologised for what he had done and said he did not know what had come over him.

In reply to Mr MacEntee, Det Garda Connolly agreed the defendant was very distressed in the Garda station and a doctor was called after he said he felt suicidal.

He had married at the age of 17 and worked as well as spending a short time in the Army, but was now unemployed. Occasionally he did odd jobs and he had no previous convictions.

The defendant told gardai the abuse began when he was messing with his eldest daughter on a couch.

He said he never used violence on his daughters. He also said he never used contraceptives while having sex with them.

Consultant psychiatrist Ms Frances Knott said she found him very cooperative, pleasant, agreeable and worried for his daughters. He had been abused by a man when he was seven and this bad a major effect on his ability to control his sexual drive.

Dr Knott said he was willing to undergo a treatment programme involving therapy in conjunction with a drug to reduce his sexual drive and any aggression. She felt he could be rehabilitated.

Mr MacEntee asked Mr Justice Carney to ignore what he called a "value judgment" in a victim impact report, stating "this is the worst case of its kind ever to have occurred".