Gardai re-arrest Mr A following Supreme Court decision

Gardaí have re-arrested the man identified as Mr A following this afternoon's decision by the Supreme Court to issues warrant…

Gardaí have re-arrested the man identified as Mr A following this afternoon's decision by the Supreme Court to issues warrant for his detention.

According to a garda spokesman Mr A is being returned to prison in Dublin.

Earlier, the Supreme Court ordered the re-arrest of the 41-year old man who had been released from jail after his detention for raping a 12-year old girl was deemed unlawful.

In a judgment which caused public outcry and a massive political controversy the High Court on Tuesday granted the man known only as Mr A freedom.

READ MORE

The court ruled he could no longer be held in prison as the law he was convicted under had been wiped from the statute books the previous week.

But in a dramatic turn after a day-long hearing, five Supreme Court judges found the wrong decision had been made.

Briefly explaining their decision Chief Justice John L Murray said the court would allow the appeal brought by the state over the release of Mr A.

He told the court the decision of the High Court would be set aside and he ordered the arrest of Mr A.

Mr A's release was ordered on the basis that the law he was tried under had been struck out by the Supreme Court.

That ruling stated that it was inconsistent with the Constitution to prevent a man claiming he had made a genuine mistake about a girls' age when having sex with her.

It went on to say that a man who had sex with an underage girl should not automatically be deemed guilty of rape. Mr A pleaded guilty to having sex with the 12-year old.

He had plied her with alco-pops and Vodka before sleeping with her.

The Supreme Court ruled today that the law he was convicted under was to be unconstitutional but that would not allow him to go free.

The Chief Justice told the court that Mr A had made no objection to the charge and that he pleaded guilty while accepting the jurisdiction of the courts and therefore there is no breach of his constitutional rights.

PA