A father-of-three who made a false statement to the police which resulted in an innocent man being charged with sexually assaulting a woman has been jailed for nine months.
Paul Gillespie (25), of Epworth Street in Londonderry, pleaded guilty at the city’s Crown Court to perverting the course of justice by making the false allegation in April 2009.
As a result of his false statement, a jury was empanelled to hear the case against the innocent man.
On the day of the trial on April 26 of this year, Gillespie contacted the police and made a second statement which was different to his original statement.
A prosecution barrister told Judge Piers Grant that on April 6, 2009, following a function in the City Hotel, Gillespie made a statement to the police which corroborated a statement of a woman who alleged she'd been sexually assaulted by a man.
Following Gillespie's statement the man was charged and sent for trial.
The barrister said as a result of Gillespie's second statement on the date of the trial, it was decided there was insufficient evidence to bring a successful prosecution.
“Credibility was such an issue that the prosecution could not proceed,” he said.
No evidence was offered and the jury was instructed to find the innocent man not guilty by direction.
When he was interviewed by the police about perverting the course of justice, Gillespie said he did not want to go into the witness box and commit perjury.
Defence counsel Seamus McNeill said Gillespie, who had a clear record, was motivated to make the false statement out of loyalty because the woman was a work colleague.
Mr McNeill said: “He then realised things had gotten out of hand and he now accepts his actions were despicable and dishonourable,” he said.
Jailing Gillespie, Judge Grant said that by his actions he and the woman who made the allegation had both “done a great disservice to women and undermines the protection that society and the courts seek to be in place”.
Judge Grant said: “An allegation of this nature is something everybody would fear. It would be their worst nightmare to have an allegation of sexual assault made which is supported by another person. It has to be recognised that in a small jurisdiction such as this, word gets out and reputations are seriously damaged."
Link: http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/northern-ireland/man-is-jailed-for-making-false-sex-assault-statement-16059250.html
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
A prosecution barrister told Judge Piers Grant that on April 6, 2009, following a function in the City Hotel, Gillespie made a statement to the police which corroborated a statement of a woman who alleged she'd been sexually assaulted by a man.
When he was interviewed by the police about perverting the course of justice, Gillespie said he did not want to go into the witness box and commit perjury.
Defence counsel Seamus McNeill said Gillespie, who had a clear record, was motivated to make the false statement out of loyalty because the woman was a work colleague.
So what of the actual fase accuser?
So what of the actual fase accuser?
My question as well but I think we know the answer to that one.
Gwallen - ”So what of the actual fase accuser?”
I was wondering the very same thing.
He gets 9 months for lying on her behalf, but what did she get for starting the Big Lie, and then encouraging Gillespie to lie to further her lie. And, why is he named, but not she?Let me guess…they’re hiding behind the fact that her crime was directly related to an alleged sexual offense, whereas his was only secondarily related.
C'mon guys, just because he lied doesn't mean that she wasn't raped. Obviously, she was telling the truth, but now she lacks credibility because of his lie. It's his fault the prosecution can't go forward so he must go to jail. She is no less a victim because of it. If the prosecutor can't destroy the life of a known rapist, then why not destroy the life of the man who refused to get with the program and help destroy the rapist. Afterall, a woman accused a man of rape, therefore he is a rapist and should have been punished. The guy who refused to stick with the lie is a rape supporter and is promoting rape culture.
/sarcasm
TDOM
thank you TDOM. To the rest of you I AM the accuser as you call me. I DID NOT LIE in my statement. Paul Gillespie changed his statement once he realised the case was going to trial. He did this because he didn't want to give evidence against this man who was also a work colleague. He never said he made anything up, he changed some things in his statement which led to him no longer being a credible witness. As for Judge Grant his comments were wrong and I have have made a complaint about this and requested a meeting with him. I reported this man as I felt it my duty to protect other women, if he could do this to me he would do it to anyone. In this case it is the press and Judge Grant who have done the disservice to women by thier misinformed assumptions. It would help if people remembered that the man in this case was found not guilty because there wasn't even a trial!!!! I never got to speak! But I will take that opportunity when I meet the judge. The justice system is a farce. I have been branded a liar, the main witness is in jail and that creep is getting on with his life. I wish I'd never made a statement because as soon as I did I was the one under scutiny. Justice!!!! Never!!
Post a Comment