Man jailed for sexual assault and false imprisonment

This article contains references to sexual assault involving minors. Reader discretion is advised.

By Claire Henry

A judge has said that the sexual assault carried out almost 20 years ago was “a gross violation of the body of a child and the violation of his childhood innocence”.

Dublin Circuit Criminal Court heard that Eric Thompson (49) of no fixed abode was found guilty of sexual assault and false imprisonment on an unknown date between January 2004 and July 2006 at an address on Parnell Street, Dublin 1.

Thompson has 34 previous convictions, with ten convictions for sexual assault and four for defilement of young boys. Thompson was sentenced to a combined 19 years sentence in the past.

Passing sentence, Judge Orla Crowe said this defendant was convicted of false imprisonment and sexual assault. She said during the trial she heard evidence that Thomas had been involved in running a laundrette and had told the injured party that he had brand named clothes in the laundrette he could have.

Judge Crowe said the victim impact statement was given in “a very dignified way,” and he gave a “clear outline of the profound effect this offending had on a happy 14-year-old boy”. She said, “The victim impact statement showed the love this injured party has for his family and that his family has for him.”

The judge said this court takes the sexual assault as the principal offence and the false imprisonment as the secondary one. She said this was “a gross violation of the body of a child and the violation of his childhood innocence”. She said this had to be marked with a significant custodial sentence.

Judge Crowe noted the aggravating factors in this case was that Thomas deliberately lured a child, force was used to remove his clothing, the impact this has had on the injured party and the defendant’s previous convictions. She noted the mitigating factors as Thomas’s acceptance of the jury’s verdict, his medical difficulties, his difficult childhood and his poor education.

Judge Crowe sentenced Thomas to five years in prison, but said, “To incentivise the rehabilitation that he clearly needs and for the safety of society, I will suspend the final 12 months for two years and place him under the supervision of the Probation Services.” She directed that he follow all directions they deemed necessary.

At a previous hearing, Detective Garda Lynsey Hennelly told Brian Storan, BL, prosecuting, that the offence took place 20 years ago, and the injured party was then a 14 or 15-year-old boy. The offending came to light after the injured party had his first child and he came to the conclusion “enough was enough”. He then disclosed what had happened to his partner.

The court heard the then-young boy would go to a chipper with his father. Thomas worked there and became friendly with the man and his son. On one occasion, the boy went to the chipper by himself. Thompson invited the boy into a laundrette that he was also involved in on Parnell Street. Thompson brought the boy into a back office and locked the door.

Det Gda Hennelly gave evidence Thomas then took down the teenager’s trousers and underwear and placed his hand on the boy’s penis and genital area. The court heard that he left his hand there for about 30 seconds. During the sexual assault, Thomas had a smile on his face.

The court heard that after the assault, the injured party felt “sick, dirty and scared” and that he was confused. Thomas was interviewed but denied the incidents. When asked if he knew the injured party, he said, “I have never heard of him in my life”.

A victim impact statement was read to the court in which the victim said:

“I was a happy, Jack the lad, class clown when I was 14 and 15. That instantly changed when Eric Thomas sexually assaulted me”

“I felt sick, I felt different to the rest of the lads. I was held back”.

“I found myself more aggressive, and it got me in trouble. I was taking it out on others because I couldn’t take it out on him”.

“I didn’t want to live anymore and couldn’t tell anyone why. I started to use drugs to numb things out, and it worked for a while”.

“No matter what justice I get here today, it will never leave me.” “Whatever pain you go through, it won’t be half what I have gone through”.

“I am looking you dead in the eyes; you don’t scare me anymore”.

Gda Hennelly agreed with David Perry BL, defending, that he was not subject to any probation supervision upon his client’s release from prison.

The garda agreed with counsel that Thomas was sleeping rough near Dublin Airport from when he was released from prison late last year to when he went into custody on this matter.

Mr Perry handed a report to the court, which outlined his client’s background, education and personal circumstances. He said Thomas had a “turbulent upbringing” and used alcohol and drugs.

Counsel said Thomas used “self-destructive behaviours,” but he has now gotten these behaviours under control. The court heard that Thomas has many medical conditions and had spent a significant amount of time in custody for similar offences. During this time, he has engaged in both group and individual therapy and has also engaged in the “Building Better Lives Programme”.

Mr Perry told the court that his client is now an enhanced prisoner who works in the prison kitchen. He said Thomas had suffered from mental health issues during his time in custody.

He asked the court to take into account that since these offences were committed, his client has served a significant amount of time in custody and has undergone rehabilitation. He said his client has the capacity to rehabilitate and is willing to do so.

He asked the court to structure a suspended portion of the sentence so Thomas could engage with post-release supervision, which would be of benefit to him.