Man jailed for five years for childhood rapes

This article contains references to rape and sexual assault. Reader discretion is advised.

By Fiona Ferguson and Eimear Dodd

A Wicklow man has been jailed for five years for the rape of three children committed when he was a teenager over 20 years ago.

Anthony Nugent (38) was convicted following a Central Criminal Court trial earlier this year of sexual assault, oral rape and anal rape of the first boy on dates between 1999 and 2002.

The child was between eight and 10 years old, while Nugent was between 13 and 15 years old.

Nugent of Mountain View, Ballyguile, Wicklow Town, was also convicted by the jury of anal and oral rape of a second child between 2000 and 2002 when the boy was aged between seven and nine years old and he was between 14 and 16 years old.

He was further convicted of anal rape of a third child on dates between 2000 and 2002, while the victim was aged between nine and ten years old, and he was aged between 13 and 16 years old.

Nugent has previous convictions for road traffic offences and criminal damage. The court heard that the victims wished to waive their anonymity to allow Nugent to be named.

Imposing sentence, Mr Justice Kerida Naidoo noted the seriousness of the offending, the victim’s ages at the time and the harm caused to each of them. 

He said he would set a headline sentence of 14 years for an adult in respect of the rape offences against the first two victims and a headline sentence of eight years in respect of the rape offence to the third injured party. 

Mr Justice Naidoo noted that Nugent was a teenager at the time of his offending and that youth is considered a “significant” mitigating factor in law. He reduced the headline sentences to seven years and four years, respectively, to reflect Nugent’s young age at the time.

The judge noted that while Nugent was older than the three victims “whose innocence he exploited”, he was also “himself a child” in law at the time. 

Having considered the other mitigating factors and Nugent’s personal circumstances, Mr Justice Naidoo imposed an effective global sentence of five years and six months, backdated to October 24, when he went into custody.  

He suspended the final six months of the sentence under strict conditions and directed Nugent to place himself under the supervision of the probation services for two years post-release.

The Central Criminal Court previously heard from two of the victims of the devastating and long-lasting effects the offending has had on them throughout their lives.

The first victim read his own victim impact statement at a previous hearing and addressed Nugent directly. He told Nugent that what he had done had destroyed his life. He said the abuse had broken his spirit, scarred his soul and hurt his physical body. He said the memories of it still haunt him.

The man had told gardai how the abuse began when the then-teenage Nugent asked him if he wanted to play a “secret game” and brought him to his bedroom, where he sexually assaulted him.

He described how Nugent had lied to get what he wanted, preying on a child’s innocence and knowing no child wants to be left out. He said he had hated himself for falling for his lies.

“I don’t hate you for what you did, but you have to be ashamed,” he said, “It is good for you to see the consequences.”

He told Nugent he had manipulated young boys: “You used young children so you could get sexual pleasure.”

Nugent’s current partner told the court that she believed him when he told her that the charges were not true. She described his caring role within their household before he went into custody.

She asked the judge to “please go easy on him” and asked the court, with Christmas coming up, to give the “best present” and set him free. “He did not do anything wrong,” she told the court.

Mr Justice Kerida Naidoo noted the mitigation, which described Nugent as a “good and supportive family man, employee and friend”.

He said the court noted the offending occurred over 20 years ago and accepted the contents of a report in relation to the defendant, his partner, and family. 

Mr Justice Naidoo noted the defence asked the court to consider not imposing an immediate custodial sentence but said he could not agree to this due to the seriousness of the offending and the impact on the victims.

A local garda told Fionnuala O’Sullivan SC, prosecuting, that the majority of the sexual abuse of each of the boys took place in the defendant’s bedroom after he had invited them there to play “secret” games.

One of the victims reported the rapes happening between 20 and 60 times over two summers and said other children were sometimes present.

The garda said the defendant was interviewed after the men came forward as adults, and he denied the allegations.

The garda agreed with Paddy McCarthy SC, defending, that TUSLA had issued a “satisfactory” report following an investigation in relation to the defendant and his current partner and family.

The first victim read his own victim impact in court and addressed Nugent directly, telling him: “There are two people in this room who know what you did….It’s me and you.”

He described the damaging effects of the abuse on his life, such as losing the ability to trust others, feeling dirty, self-hatred and trying to escape reality through substance abuse. He outlined how he had felt suicidal, suffered nightmares and had issues in his relationships.

He told the court how he had changed as a result of the abuse, affecting his relationship with his family, making him isolated and feeling like he had lost hope.

He said Nugent had made up stories about him when he was telling the truth and tried to make him out to be a liar. 

He said being under cross-examination during the trial was one of the worst times of his life.

He said Nugent had shown no remorse, hurt him, his family and friends and taken away his enjoyment of life.

The second victim did not make a victim impact statement.

The third victim told the court in his victim impact statement that the abuse had caused him to be a totally different person, leaving him confused and unable to trust people. He said his mental health had suffered, and he had blamed himself.

He described how he had tried to bury his confusion, shame and guilt. He said he now wants to move on with his life.

Paddy McCarthy SC, defending called evidence from several witnesses, including a friend of Nugent, his employer and his current partner. He also handed in several letters to the court.

The friend told the court Nugent was one of his closest and best friends and found him to be an honest, hardworking, decent man. He said he was shocked at the verdict.

Nugent’s employer said he found him to be an excellent worker, sincere and never had any reason to distrust him. He said he hoped Nugent would be “able to pick up the pieces of his life after this dreadful chapter.”

Mr McCarthy asked the court to take into account the length of time the case goes back and that Nugent had lived a “blameless life” in the intervening decades. He submitted Nugent was hardworking and honest.

He said Nugent had a responsible role in relation to his family and partner and a “satisfactory” report was issued in relation to that. He submitted Nugent was no danger to the public and had been shown to be trustworthy for 24 years. He asked the court what was the benefit in sending him to jail.

Counsel asked the court to take into account Nugent’s lack of maturity at the time.