Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Parent guilty of assault causing serious harm to child on basis of ‘common design’
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
Supreme Court dismisses appeal from Court of Appeal, and affirms the conviction of a parent for assault causing serious harm to their child, despite the parent not being physically present during the critical incident. The Court found that the parent's participation in a series of prior assaults and the established pattern of abuse constituted a common design with the co-accused spouse, thereby affirming the recklessness and liability of the absent parent for the injuries inflicted by the spouse. The original decision by the Dublin Circuit Criminal Court to convict the parent was based on the doctrine of common design, which the Supreme Court found was correctly applied by the trial judge in directing the jury.
Assault causing serious harm, child cruelty, common design, joint enterprise, recklessness, liability, Supreme Court, Dublin Circuit Criminal Court, Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act 1997, Children Act 2001, conviction, mental element, intention, participation, criminal enterprise, serious injury, brain injury, pattern of abuse, recklessness, jury direction.
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
