Mother of five who slapped, boxed and threatened her children walks free from Court of Appeal
The five children had been subject to physical, verbal and emotional abuse by the woman between September 2019 and December 2020
A mother who slapped, boxed and called her five children derogatory names walked from the Court of Appeal on Thursday after she successfully argued that the trial judge did not adequately address her rehabilitation efforts when jailing her for one year.
The woman (38), who cannot be named in order to protect the identity of her children, was jailed at Trim Circuit Criminal Court just last month on five counts of cruelty to her children who were aged between 11 and four-years-old at the time.
The woman pleaded guilty and was jailed for two years with the final 12 months suspended on all five counts with the concurrent sentences to run from March 8.
The woman had entered five guilty pleas before Judge John Martin for offences under Section 246 of the Children Act 2001.
The five children had been subject to physical, verbal and emotional abuse by the woman between September 2019 and December 2020.
The woman appealed the custodial element of the sentence on grounds of severity.
At the Court of Appeal on Thursday, Kathleen Leader SC, for the woman, submitted that her client’s rehabilitation efforts had not been fully acknowledged by the sentencing judge, who had identified a three-year pre-mitigation headline sentence.
The sentencing judge had ruled that the threshold for a custodial sentence had been crossed but reduced the woman's sentence by one year in acknowledgement of her guilty plea and other mitigating factors, said counsel.
The judge then suspended the final year of the sentence in the interests of rehabilitation, said Ms Leader.
Counsel submitted that the trial judge “fell into an error in principle” in relation to the custodial penalty imposed.
Ms Leader said that her client had entered a guilty plea on all counts, had endured a difficult upbringing and was an alcoholic.
Ms Leader said she had “no issue” with the three-year headline sentence but had an issue solely with the custodial element.
Counsel said the circumstances behind the offending was that the woman’s partner had left the domestic residence and that her client was “under pressure at the time”.
Ms Leader said the woman had a “bad” problem with alcohol but that her client’s “slapping, boxing and shouting” at the children was a means to “exercise control”. “She could not cope and had issues with mental health,” said Ms Leader.
Counsel said her client was using “the wrong means of exercising control”, had a history of depression and had previously suffered suicidal ideation.
Ms Leader said the woman, who is now drink and drug free, has completed educational courses and meets her children, who are in care, bi-weekly. She has also completed a 12-week alcohol treatment programme in the Cuan Mhuire addiction facility.
Ms Leader also said her client was taking her medication, going to counselling and had been voluntarily working with children in the community at the time of her sentencing.
Responding, Carl Hanahoe BL, for the State, said the case was a “difficult” one but that the State did not accept that the trial judge had made an error in principle when sentencing the woman.
Mr Hanahoe said public interest was not confined to the prospect of rehabilitation and that the trial judge had operated within his discretion when imposing the sentence.
Mr Hanahoe said the principles of sentencing were “punishment, deterrence and rehabilitation” and that the “interests of society are present in all three”.
“The principle is that a trial judge must be mindful of the personal circumstance of the offender and of the gravity of the offence. One can never be blind to the surrounding circumstances but one must endeavour to maintain focus on the sentencing process. That is precisely what the trial judge did in this case,” said counsel.
Delivering the court’s ruling, Ms Justice Tara Burns said the case was a “difficult” one and that the children had been subject to “physical interactions”, called “very derogatory names” and threatened.
Ms Justice Burns said it was “understandable” that the trial judge identified three years as a headline sentence “in light of the extent of behaviour towards the children” and the court found this did not amount to an error in principle.
"However, it is also clear that this appellant has taken great steps. She clearly recognised the wrongs done to her children and has made progress going to her understanding regarding her struggle to cope and she has had a very difficult personal history,” said Ms Justice Burns.
“She is a caring mother and was very, very unfortunate she did not have those skills when she was with the children. It is important that the child-and-mother bond is maintained. One is hopeful that going forward she can maintain that bond,” said Ms Justice Burns.
Ms Justice Burns said that in light of the evidence before the court regarding rehabilitation, the trial judge had made an error in principle and that the Court of Appeal would quash the original sentence.
In re-sentencing the woman, Ms Justice Burns said the court would sentence the woman to a fully-suspended two-year sentence to start from Thursday and take into consideration the amount of time already served in custody by the appellant.
For the latest breaking news and top stories, visit our homepage.
Join the Irish Mirror’s breaking news service on WhatsApp. Click this link to receive breaking news and the latest headlines direct to your phone. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don’t like our community, you can check out any time you like. If you’re curious, you can read our Privacy Notice .
Related
Share this page
Guest Posts by Easy Branches
