On the opening day, the jury was told of allegations that the defendant had abused the complainant at multiple locations between the summer of 1999 and March 2005, from when she was nine to 15 years old.

A detective garda told the trial that the complainant made a statement over several hours on June 5 and June 12, 2022, alleging abuse by the defendant “of a historic nature”.

The man was arrested for questioning on September 20, 2022. A transcript of his interviews was read to the jury by prosecuting counsel Garnet Orange. He told the interviewing garda that he had known the complainant as a child because she was a relative of his wife.

The transcript included several denials of the accusations made against him. On one occasion, he told the interviewing garda that his accuser was “a very troubled young girl”.

Later in the interview, he said: “It is all made up” and also said: “It is malicious”.

He told gardaí: “I believe she had a troubled childhood” and described the allegations as “a cry for attention".

He later said: “It is all made up. None of it ever happened. There is clearly something wrong with that girl.” 

He told gardaí that he had kissed the girl on the lips on the night of his daughter’s christening, adding that he later apologised to her.

Former teacher's testimony

A former secondary school teacher of the complainant gave evidence on Thursday morning. She said she had “many interactions” with the complainant over a two-year period when she was a second and third year student. 

The teacher was concerned that the complainant may have had an eating disorder. The former teacher “became aware that (the complainant) was spending a lot of time with a neighbouring family”, which she thought to be a “little strange”.

She said that while there were “question marks” in her head about it, “it wasn’t her job to investigate”. She said the complainant told her about “stuff of a sexual nature going on” in the early 2000s.

She told the court: “By then, we had the original Children First guidelines in school.” She informed the principal of the school “with (the complainant’s) knowledge”, she said.

She said she also had a “discussion” with the complainant’s parents. She said: “I did not feel they particularly welcomed me or my information.” 

The former teacher said she had made “copious notes” during the two years, but said she left the school in 2010, leaving the notes behind as they were the property of the school.

She agreed in cross-examination that she was basing her evidence on recollections from over a quarter of a century ago.

She said the response from the complainant’s parents when she made them aware of what the complainant had told her about “sexual stuff going on” was “not warm”.

She continued: “I certainly would have expected a different response.” She also said she would have expected “a much more alarmed response” from them.

Closing arguments were made on Thursday afternoon.