Sex abuse trial continues

A social worker who interviewed a boy who has accused his father of sexual abuse has told a jury that although he did not initially make a complaint of a sexual nature the child asked to see him again and later disclosed inappropriate touching

The 73-year-old accused man has pleaded not guilty at the Central Criminal Court to sexually assaulting his son from the age of three to six and sexually assaulting and raping two daughters between the ages of four and 11 at various locations between 1995 and 2002.

The witness told Ms Isobel Kennedy SC (with Ms Anne Marie Lawlor BL), prosecuting, that a guardian ad litem was an experienced social work practitioner who is an independent person who provides information and advice to courts on children's welfare.

This person will convey the children’s wishes and feelings in relation to future care arrangements and also give their own advice to what is in the child's best interests.

He told Ms Kennedy that he was appointed the children’s guardian ad litem in 2000 and as part of his duties later he had an interview with the man’s son in October 2001.

He said the boy made disclosures of physical abuse and inappropriate sexual touching at that meeting.

The man told Mr Blaise O’Carroll SC, defending, during cross examination that the interview was not video taped but there was a transcript taken.

When asked by Mr O’Carroll how the meeting had come about he said that the boy had asked to see him.

He agreed that he had an earlier meeting with the boy in September 2001 and in that meeting the boy made allegations of physical abuse against his parents but did not make allegations of a sexual nature against his father. The boy was eight years old at the time of that interview.

He agreed he asked the boy at that meeting if there was anything else he wanted to talk about or that was making him uncomfortable and the child replied no. He then asked the child if he wanted to see him again and he said yes.

He said that usually he lets children mull over what they have discussed at a meeting and over a period of time as trust is built up they can make disclosures safe in knowledge that nothing will happen to them.

The man agreed that at the next meeting in October that the child told him he had forgotten to tell him something and said his father had told him to touch his private parts. He said he did not prompt him.

Asked if he remembered generating a report about an access visit after the children were taken into care when the eldest daughter and the son had sat in their father's lap he agreed that he had observed an access visit but was not sure if he wrote a report on it.

Mr O’Carroll told him that the accused man recalled him doing a “robot dance” to entertain the children at that visit. The witness told Mr O’Carroll he would stay in the background at those visits so the children could spend quality time with their parents and it was not his role to entertain families.

He agreed with Mr O’Carroll that a plan to house the children together in a unit did not happen and he said he was concerned about the care arrangements because there was a “constant campaign by both parents to disrupt the placements.”

The trial continues before Mr Justice George Birmingham and a jury of eight men and four women.