Case a textbook example of dangers of social media for teenagers - judge

A judge has warned of the dangers of ‘indiscriminate’ use of social media by teenagers after hearing evidence in a case where a young male was charged with defilement of a child under 15 years of age.
The male, who was 16 at the time, pleaded guilty to the charge relating to an incident with a girl who was 14 years-old at the time.
However the male, now 18, who cannot be named in order to protect the identity of the victim, contested the victim’s account of what happened.
A Newton hearing was, therefore, heard before Judge Rory McCabe at Castlebar Circuit Criminal Court last Tuesday and Wednesday. A Newton hearing is generally used where there is a guilty plea to a charge by the defendant but some of the facts of the case are in dispute.
Therefore, despite the guilty plea, the victim had to give evidence and face cross examination. The male argued that the sexual activity that took place on the date in question was consensual, which was disputed by the girl. He denied in court that he had sexual intercourse with her, though it was stated that he had previously said he did.
The case heard that the two teenagers had communicated via phone and Facebook but had never met face to face until the evening of the incident itself.
The girl, now 15, told the court that the male, who was two years and eight months older than her at the time of the incident, threatened to put a picture on Facebook, ‘tagging’ the girl in it, if she did not meet him.
She said after she finished school on Friday, January 16, 2015, she agreed to meet him. She said it was under duress.  
They met and walked towards woodlands. The girl told the court she thought if she kissed him, she would be able to leave.
She claims the male subsequently took out a knife and threatened he would hurt a member of her family if she did not comply. She claimed he forced her to perform oral sex and then held her down while they had sex.
She said afterwards he left and she went back into the town. She said she did not tell her friends all of what happened but told one of them ‘I never want to see him again’.

Ask FM
She said her friend asked her two days later about it after her friend saw something on social networking site Ask FM. She told her friend what happened and later that week told the school counsellor, then her parents and the gardaí.
Under cross examination by Eoin Garavan, counsel for the accused, Mr Garavan argued that the fact the girl contacted the male 27 times in the two days after the incident did not indicate fear. The girl argued that he had contacted her as often and said ‘what else could I do’ but reply.
Mr Garavan asked about messages exchanged between the male and the girl the following day on Facebook which he described as ‘the chat of two flirting people’. The girl said she was ‘trying to stay onside’ and was still fearful.
Mr Garavan argued that the girl made the allegations once word got out they had been together and some of the details emerged. The girl said:
“He told everyone in his year ‘I rode (name withheld)’. I don’t know why he told people when I didn’t want to do it,” she said.
The court heard of evidence of garda interviews. The accused told gardaí he had received a phonecall from the girl’s father ‘saying he was going to kill me and called me a rapist ba****d’.
In court the male said everything that happened on the day was consensual and that they did not have sex. He said after oral sex, they talked for about 20 minutes ‘about school and stuff’. He said he was ‘sorry’ about the age gap between them.
He was asked why the girl might allege what she did if the encounter was consensual.
“I don’t know. Maybe she is embarrassed because I am a Traveller. I’m guessing to be honest,” he told the court.
He was asked by prosecuting counsel Pat Reynolds would it be normal for a teenager to meet someone for the first time and be shifting and engaging in oral sex consensually within minutes, as he stated happened.
“Yeah, young teenagers … (the) majority of them are like that,” he replied.

Verdict
Outlining the possible interpretations of the evidence available to him in making his judgement, Judge McCabe said the events described by the girl ‘probably happened’ and the reasons for this he listed as ‘the brevity of their contact in advance’, the girl’s ‘real shock afterwards’ and her ‘gradual’ telling of the incident to her friends.
However, he said he was not convinced about other factors which stopped him from concluding what was alleged was proven ‘beyond reasonable doubt’, which is the burden of proof in criminal cases.
He added that the nature of their exchanged messages on Facebook ‘doesn’t convince’ him of ‘serious conflict’.
He said the girl’s fear afterwards could be caused by one of three possible factors - a fear of the male; a fear of the reaction of her parents; or the upset of what happened becoming public knowledge. He said there is not convincing evidence to single out any one of the three possibilities.
The case highlighted a lot of dangers around the world of social media for teenagers, he said.
Judge McCabe said young people nowadays have ‘extraordinary access to information’ and it can be ‘bewildering’ for parents to keep on top of all forms of social media their children engage in.
He said young people use social media ‘indiscriminately’ and the facts of this case are ‘almost a textbook example of this’.
In concluding he stated: “I’m not saying it didn’t happen as alleged (by the girl) - it probably did - but the facts were not proven beyond reasonable doubt.”
The court was earlier told that there was no prosecution taken on sexual assault or rape charges; and that the single charge before the court was that of child defilement.
The male pleaded guilty to that charge and so a probation report is to be sought. The case has been adjourned to February 8, where a victim impact statement will also be read to the court.