Sex shop company fined over X-rated material

A company which owns a Galway sex shop was convicted and fined £2,400 at Galway District Court yesterday for being in possession…

A company which owns a Galway sex shop was convicted and fined £2,400 at Galway District Court yesterday for being in possession of prohibited X-rated videos and magazines as well as distributing an advertisement for a brothel.

Charges were brought against Shardam Trading Company (Limerick) Ltd, and its directors, Mr Damian Cuddihy and Ms Sharon Tucker, of Ballynacourty, Lisnagry, Co Limerick, who own the shop, along with two others in Limerick and Waterford. The company's licence to deal in videos was forfeited for five years.

Charges against the couple were withdrawn by the State yesterday and the company prosecuted instead. Gardai raided the Galway shop, 4 Play, at Buttermilk Walk, off Shop Street, in the city centre on two occasions last year.

The company was prosecuted for distributing an advertisement for a brothel and for the possession of three prohibited video recordings.

READ MORE

Charges were also brought for the possession of seven banned magazines and for carrying in-shop advertising for one of the banned publications.

Mr Stephen Coughlan, defending, said the company had not realised such material was in stock at its Galway shop as it had operated a sale and exchange operation, where items sold on the premises could be brought back and exchanged for other ones. Magazines and videos bought from other sources in the "subculture" had found their way into 4 Play. He contended that the directors of the company had no control over what they received in the shops. However, he added, they had since changed their system of management and now kept lists of items that could not be sold.

Garda Insp Tony O'Donnell told the court the company had a previous conviction for similar offences. It had been fined a total of £1,600 at Waterford District Court last September.

Judge John Garavan convicted the company of having three prohibited videos in its possession and fined it £500 for each. He also fined the company £50 for each of the eight magazine offences and £500 for distributing an advertisement for a brothel. He said the shop could remain open but it no longer had a licence to sell videos and he fixed recognisance in the event of an appeal.

A charge of knowingly possessing child pornography on July 14th, 1999, was dismissed.

The court was shown a 28-minute video depicted the spanking of a small, adult Oriental girl, who was naked from the waist down and who posed as a child.

Judge Garavan agreed the video was produced to titillate anyone depraved enough to watch it, but there was no explicit sexual contact in it. He ruled it was depraved and degrading, but it did not come within the strict definition of child pornography as outlined in the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998.