A jury has found a 50-year-old man guilty of sexually assaulting a woman he met for the first time in a public park.
The offending occurred last year after the pair struck up a conversation about a mutual interest in dogs.
The defendant, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, denied two counts of sexual assault in Dundalk on August 1, 2025.
His victim testified that he licked her leg before squeezing her breasts and digitally penetrating her vagina, an incident which occurred in the afternoon as she walked her sister’s dog.
The accused, who did not take the stand during a four-day trial at Dundalk Circuit Court and had the assistance of an interpreter, told gardaí that the sexual activity was initiated by the woman.
Under cross-examination the complainant admitted that she had given the man her number for the purpose of selling him drugs, and defence counsel argued that she did not tell the full truth and had withheld “significant and important” information from gardaí.
However, after deliberating for just over two hours the jury of seven men and five women returned unanimous guilty verdicts on each charge.
The victim said that when she entered the park around 4pm the dog was off the leash. It ran towards a man sitting cross-legged on the grass.
She ran over to see if he was okay with dogs. He replied that he liked dogs and that was how a conversation started.
He had “quite good” English. He told her that he had a German Shepherd in his native country and a Golden Retriever in Ireland.
They showed each other pictures of dogs on their phones. The witness said the interaction was “quite friendly”. She was “half sitting”, “half kneeling” beside him.
After five minutes or so she alleged that he told her that she was “very sexy”. This made her uneasy and she started getting up.
“He grabbed me by the leg and pulled me back down. He licked my leg and tried to kiss me.
“I got up again. He jumped up and got me into a bear hug from behind. He was trying to push me into bushes.”
She said that he managed to get her on the ground. He was right on top of her. She was lying face down. He was face down on her back.
“He pinned my arms under me. He squeezed both my breasts hard enough to hurt.”
The women said that this man inserted two or three fingers into her vagina after putting his hand inside her leggings and underwear.
“It hurt a lot anyway, whatever he was doing, scratching my insides.
“He was trying to French kiss me. I was pulling away. I was screaming for help. No one was around.”
The witness said that she saw a teenage boy in the distance and that the man must have seen someone as well. It startled him.
“He kind of let go of me, and I was able to slip out from under him.”
She said that she got a WhatsApp message from the accused afterwards.
“I don’t know how he got my number. He didn’t ask for it. I didn’t give it.”
She saw his face in the profile picture. She blocked him.
Under cross-examination by Barra McGrory SC, with Cliodhna Breen BL, instructed by solicitor Peter Lavery, the witness denied initiating the sexual activity by taking the defendant’s hand and putting it under her clothes.
Neither did she take his phone and give him her number.
It was put to the witness that there would be call log evidence showing her number in the man’s contacts.
The woman accepted that there was a call to her phone from his.
Under further cross-examination the witness admitted selling drugs.
“Yes, I’m telling the jury I’m a drug dealer. I take people’s numbers and I gave him mine. I gave him my phone number for the purpose of selling drugs. I put my number in his phone.”
She accepted that she got some messages from him the next day.
She didn’t tell gardaí about giving the man her number.
The witness remarked that she couldn’t let them (guards) know that she was drug dealing.
It was put to her that she knew she hadn’t told the truth about what happened in the park and didn’t want the guards to find the man.
She replied, “That’s bullshit”, before apologising.
The woman admitted using drugs. She said that she wasn’t on drugs that day, a Friday.
She denied that this was all a “make up allegation”.
A doctor from the Forensic Science Ireland laboratory said that a swab from the woman’s shin indicated the presence of saliva, but there was insufficient DNA present for a profile. There was no saliva detected from the left side of her face.
The major profile of a male specific test of the inside of the front of her underwear matched the DNA of the reference profile of the accused.
Cross-examined by Mr McGrory, the doctor said she can’t tell when or how the DNA got there.
“The issue of consent cannot be addressed in our lab.”
The complainant’s sister testified that she was pale and shaking and began crying when she returned from the park. She told her what had happened.
Her sister didn’t say that she had given the man her number under a false name for the purpose of selling drugs.
Det Gda Siobhán McCoy testified that the woman got very unsettled, upset and was visibly shaking when she returned to the park with gardaí before attending SATU (Sexual Assault Treatment Unit) at the Rotunda Hospital.
The officer spoke of her “surprise” when she encountered the accused in the park the next day, August 2, 2025. She arrested him at 7.20pm.
The jury heard that he was intoxicated, and that a doctor deemed him unfit for interview. The doctor was also concerned about the man’s heart rate and blood pressure. He was brought to hospital.
An interview took place two days later. The defendant told investigators that after his conversation with the woman in the park they shook hands, kissed and hugged.
He said that she took his hand and put it on her. The accused continued that he snatched his hand back.
She said, “Fuck you, bastard”. He spat on her face.
He called her to not contact him. He was embarrassed. He texted her to see how she was.
The man denied in the interview that the incident occurred as she described.
Mr McGrory said to Det Gda McCoy that gardaí were armed with the phone downloads to show that the defendant was telling the truth about the complainant putting her number in his phone. He asked why the woman wasn’t challenged on this.
The witness said she asked repeatedly asked how the number got there, and the woman didn’t have an explanation.
The jury also heard that the complainant said she had sent gardaí an email after a neighbour told her of a man matching her assailant’s description who frequented the park.
However, gardaí had no record of ever having received such an email.
In her closing speech to the jury, prosecuting counsel Miska Hanahoe BL, instructed by Louth State Solicitor Fergus Mullen, said that consent was the central issue in the case.
The complainant did lie to gardaí to cover up drug dealing. Drug dealing was not relevant to the issue.
She was very clear about what happened in the park. She was credible, consistent and forthright about what happened.
The defendant’s account didn’t stand up to scrutiny, Ms Hanahoe continued.
Mr McGrory said that the woman had in fact given his client her number and put it into his phone.
She had “manipulated the evidence” to suit her own purposes, and was a person capable of withholding the truth.
Counsel said that this must cause the jury to have a doubt.
After the jury delivered its verdict, Judge Dara Hayes thanked them for their service, remarking it was not an easy case.
The defendant was remanded in custody to February 24 for sentencing.
Before the jury was empanelled, Mr Lavery applied to the court to withdraw his services because of the solicitors’ strike.
In response to Judge Hayes, he said that his client wanted the trial to proceed.
The judge said his concern was that to accede to the application would mean another three months before a trial which would leave the accused 18 months in custody awaiting trial.
He said that he understood the position but that it was not for him to comment on the dispute.
The application was refused.
Funded by the Courts Reporting Scheme