A judge has repeated his previous concerns over the Public Prosecution Service’s (PPS) decision to keep a case of alleged revenge porn in the lower court, which he feels does not have sufficient sentencing powers for the offence, in the event of conviction.
When contacted, the PPS stood over the decision but declined to answer if the concerns raised by judges in these instances are being taken into consideration.
Lucy Carolan (25) from Coolnafranky Park, Cookstown is accused of two counts of disclosing a private sexual photograph or film of a female without her consent, and with the intention of causing her distress.
In addition, Carolan is charged with assaulting the female on September 5.
While no details surrounding the circumstances of the alleged offending were disclosed during the short hearing, a prosecuting lawyer stated two previous counts of harassment and misusing a public communications network by sending her an indecent message have been withdrawn.
She also advised Carolan is accused of disclosing the private sexual imagery on two consecutive days – September 15 and 16, of 2022.
District Judge Michael Ranaghan enquired in which court level the case is to be heard “given the nature of the charges”.
The prosecutor advised it was staying in the lower court to which the judge replied: “That’s not something I’m overly happy about. While I know nothing about the actual facts, the maximum sentence in this court is six months. If there are aggravating features this court’s hands are tied. But the decision has been taken and I have no power whatsoever to send this to a higher court.”
Judge Ranaghan also pointed out the alleged offending by disclosing the images twice on consecutive days “makes the case even more serious. I could ask for a review as I’ve done that before, but it tends to be pointless, so I won’t bother. I’ll simply deal with the matter at sentencing if it reaches that point and whatever comments I make, so be it.”
He remanded Carolan on continuing bail to return to court on October 11 when she is to indicate how she intends to plead.
Meanwhile, the PPS was asked to comment on the decision to retain this case in the lower court and if due cognisance of the concerns of various judges in these instances is being fully taken onboard.
A spokesperson replied, said: “The PPS received an investigation file from police in April 2023 reporting one individual in relation to allegations reported to police in October 2022. All the available evidence submitted by police was carefully considered by a Senior Public Prosecutor.
“The decision to prosecute one individual in the Magistrates’ Court for two counts of disclosing a private sexual photograph with the intent to cause distress and one of common assault issued in September 2023 after it was determined that the Test for Prosecution was met on evidential grounds and, taking all relevant factors into account, that the Magistrates’ Court was the appropriate venue for the prosecution to proceed.”
The question on due cognisance of judges’ concerns was not addressed.
