Taxi driver fails in rape appeal

A Limerick taxi driver has failed in his appeal against his conviction for raping a young woman he drove home from a nightclub.

The Court of Criminal Appeal today rejected the appeal brought by John Ryan (aged 45) of Clonard, Westbury, who was jailed for seven years in February last year after a jury found him guilty of rape and sexual assault by majority verdict.

He had pleaded not guilty at the Central Criminal Court to the rape and sexual assault of the woman on October 17, 2007 after picking her up in his cab a short distance from a Limerick nightclub.

The court heard that Ryan drove his then 21-year-old victim to a secluded area 20 minutes from where he collected her. The married cab driver then told her to take off her clothes before he removed his and raped and sexually assaulted her.

Ryan left the meter running during the incident and gardaí were able to track him down using a receipt the woman grabbed before leaving the car.

Counsel for the applicant, Mr Paul McDermott SC, told the appeal court that Ryan’s trial had been conducted on an unfair basis as, during closing speeches, prosecution counsel Mr Tom Creed SC had commented on the accused man’s decision not to give evidence.

He said that although Mr Creed did not directly comment on Ryan’s failure to give evidence, his reference to it amounted to a “commentary on fact” as he spoke on the matter directly after making a “robust critique” on false statements Ryan had given to gardai.

Mr McDermott said that matters were further compounded matters by a historical explanation given to the jury as to why an accused may and, up to 1924, could not give evidence on their own behalf, including the premise that an accused could “walk himself in to incrimination” by doing so.

He said that the trial judge erred in principle by deciding not to warn the jury about convicting the accused on the uncorroborated evidence of the complainant, before going on to give them an ambiguous caution on the nature of such evidence without making reference to the dangers of convicting on this basis.

Mr Creed, for the State, said that during the trial he had merely mentioned the fact that Ryan had chosen not to give evidence and this was not utilised to infer anything against the accused man.

He said that Mr Justice Patrick McCarthy was not obliged to give a corroboration warning during his charge and chose not to do so.

Returning an extemporary judgement, Mr Justice Michael Hanna said the court found that Mr Creed’s remarks did not constitute comment and would not have been sufficiently serious for the trial judge to discharge the jury even if deemed to be so.

He said the court did not accept that there was “any great confusion” caused by the decision of Mr Justice McCarthy to subject the evidence to a “quantitative analysis” and refer to corroboration in his charge.