The Nagle case - Sentence does not reflect our values
By identifying her we would add to the trauma she endured at the hands of her attacker and the outrage she, her family, and anyone who cares about the values this society is supposed to cherish must feel at the sentence handed down in the Nagle case. In it a man was convicted of making and having child pornography and using a child for sexual exploitation.
Most of us will, or at least should, feel a deep anger because of the inadequate sentence imposed on the child’s attacker, “family friend” Anthony Nagle, aged 48.
Nagle met the teenager while she was celebrating her Junior Certificate results. He lured her to his flat and on the way there bought 12 bottles of WKD — one of those appalling, gateway, alcopop products aimed at those who are not used to drink. Later he bought 12 more bottles. He also gave her cigarettes and cannabis.
At one point during the evening the child’s mother phoned Nagle. She said she was out of her mind with worry because her daughter had not come home at the agreed time. Nagle lied and said she was probably with friends. No, she was not, she was drunk in his flat and he had had intercourse with her and filmed the whole sorry affair.
Nagle claimed he believed that she had reached the age of consent. He apologised “profusely” and said he had been sexually assaulted as a child and was exposed to a lot of alcohol and violence. He also said that “he had attended every psychiatric unit in the city” and had attempted suicide “countless times”.
His difficulties did not, however, prevent him labelling the tape with the girl’s Christian name, dating it and storing it in a safe. His assertion that “he had no intention of doing anything with it” is not plausible.
Many of us have endured trauma and sometimes deep unhappiness, some of us are pursued by internal demons but the vast majority of us accept those burdens as unwelcome but unavoidable realities of life. We do not consider them licence to inflict wrong on others.
When he imposed a one-year jail term on Nagle, in Cork on Thursday, Judge Patrick J Moran may have been motivated by the humanity and mercy we expect from our judges. He may have been moved by generosity and forgiveness towards a troubled, unfortunate man.
But we are entitled to expect more. We are entitled to expect that the wrong done to victims be acknowledged and reflected in sentencing. We are entitled to expect that sentences act as a deterrent to others who might plan similar crimes.
Those expectations are not reflected in the one-year term — 14 years was the maximum available — imposed on Nagle. Rather, the sentence reflects a culture that does not protect the victims of sexual crime as it should. The Sexual Abuse and Violence in Ireland report in 2002 found that only one-in-12 women who are sexually assaulted will tell the gardaí. These are appalling figures and the Nagle sentence will do nothing to change them.
In recent times the Director of Public Prosecutions has opened a conversation, saying he may, when he can, say why specific cases are not prosecuted. It is within his power to appeal this sentence and if he chooses not to do so it might be no bad idea to explain why.
In recent days politicians have had to acknowledge that the electorate no longer accepts their view of the world. Any more decisions like this and the judiciary will be forced to do the same.
