Three men jailed for gang rape of student (17) launch bid to reduce sentences

Fiona Magennis

Three men jailed for the gang rape of a 17-year-old Leaving Cert student involving “degradation of the most extreme nature” have launched appeals to have their sentences reduced, arguing that the prison terms imposed were excessive.

The three were unanimously convicted by a Central Criminal Court jury on a number of charges from sexual assault to rape following a trial that ran for six weeks.

They were part of a group of five men who took part in the gang rape and who were jailed for a combined total of 66 years.

Imposing sentence in June 2022, Ms Justice Tara Burns said that the men, who were aged 17 to 19 at the time, “behaved like animals” on the night of December 27th, 2016. She said there was “not a shred of humanity or respect” in their actions.

She said that the rapes and sexual assaults committed by the men involved “degradation of the most extreme nature”. Ms Justice Burns said that in this case, “the gang rape was accompanied by filming” where a “gang of men” stood around outside a car in which a young woman was being violated.

“This depravity is absolutely shocking,” she said.

At the Court of Appeal on Tuesday, Counsel for Marcos Vinicius De Silva Umbelino argued his sentence should have been significantly reduced because he was a child at the time.

Lawyers for Gabriel Gomes Da Rocha and Eduardo Dias Ferreira Filho, meanwhile, contended the judge was wrong to place the offending in the highest category, attracting a headline sentence of between 15 years and life.

The men's sentencing hearing was told that after picking up the Leaving Cert student on a street in a midland’s town in the early hours of December 27th, 2016 she was driven to a remote dry dock in Co Westmeath.

Da Rocha (28) of Mount Armstrong, Rahan, Tullamore, Umbelino (26) of Riverview, Kilbeggan, Co Westmeath and another man took turns raping the girl, one after another. A fourth man sexually assaulted her.

At one point, the girl saw flashing through the windows of the parked car and realised that some of the men were recording the rapes on mobile phone cameras. They then travelled back to Tullamore while the girl was visibly upset and sobbing.

After dropping two men off, Umbelino drove the car to a car park. The girl pleaded to be let out, but she was held in the car by Da Rocha and Ferreira Filho (28) of Riverview, Kilbeggan.

They repeatedly asked her for a threesome and she repeatedly said no. Ferreira Filho then orally raped her at the same time as Da Rocha raped her in what was his second rape of the night.

After this, they let the girl out of the car.

In her victim impact statement, which she read aloud in court, the woman told the men: “You have made me feel like I wasn’t even a human being. What you did has stripped me of all that I am, and has rot me to the core. How could you take pleasure in doing something so horrific to another person?”

Ms Justice Burns imposed a sentence of 15 years on Umbelino. She sentenced Ferreira Filho to an 18-year prison term while Da Rocha, who had raped the girl twice, was given a 20-year jail term.

The judge suspended the final year of all these sentences and also imposed sentences to run concurrent to the other sentences, for a number of sexual assaults committed during the car journey from Tullamore to Kilbeggan.

The woman had described how the men groped and molested her and hands were coming everywhere as she tried to push them away.

Bringing an appeal against the severity of the sentence imposed on Da Rocha at the Court of Appeal on Tuesday Giollaíosa Ó Lideadha SC, argued that the headline sentence of 22 years set by the trial judge was too high.

He contended the headline sentence set for Da Rocha should have been placed in the 10-to-15-year band.

Mr Ó Lideadha argued the sentence should have been further reduced to reflect Da Rocha’s age. He told the court that, because his client was only 19 at the time, his level of culpability was diminished.

He said Da Rocha had no previous convictions and although he had fought the case, he had approached the sentencing hearing on the basis that he accepted the jury verdict.

Mr Ó Lideadha referenced other cases which involved weapons and extreme depravity and maintained that those factors “push the needle higher” but “do not apply in this case”.

In Ferreira Filho’s case, Mr Ó Lideadha said that while the offending was “very serious” the headline sentence of 20 years was “out of the appropriate range”.

Counsel argued the appropriate headline for Ferreira Filho would have been the “lower end” of the 10-to-15-year bracket. He said Filho had accepted the jury verdict at sentencing, has no previous convictions and is a married man with children. The fact he was just 19 at the time should also have been taken into consideration, Mr Ó Lideadha said.

Dominic McGinn SC, for Umbelino, said his client was a child at the time the offending occurred and that this had “ramifications in the way in which a sentence has to be imposed”.

He said a sentencing judge must adjust the headline sentence to reflect the fact that the defendant was a child at the time of the offence. Counsel argued that the proper approach is to reduce the headline sentence first, before applying any mitigation.

He said the Court of Appeal had previously said that a significant reduction was necessary in such cases. Mr McGinn noted that in the UK, that reduction is between a third and a half.

He argued the judge had made an error in giving a deduction of only a sixth, which was half what it should have been. He contended the headline sentence imposed should have been no higher than 12 years.

Counsel also submitted the amount deducted for the mitigating factors in the case, including his client’s significant medical issues and lack of significant previous offending, was insufficient.

In response, Lorcan Staines SC, for the Director of Public Prosecutions, said in relation to Da Rocha’s sentence, the trial judge had considered the relevant case law and authorities and had determined that a gang rape of this nature fell into the category of 15 years to life. He said she conducted her own analysis and rejected the submission made by the defence that it fell into the 10-to-15-year category.

Regarding the issue of age, Mr Staines said there was no particular evidence before the court in terms of Da Rocha and Ferreira Filho’s level of maturity or otherwise.

Regarding the reduction given to Umbelino who was under the age of 18 when the offences occurred, Mr Staines said the Court of Appeal, while acknowledging the existence of guidelines for reductions in the UK, found that each case must be decided on its own.

There was nothing in this case that “smacks of an error of youth,” said Mr Staines.

He said the relevant authorities suggest that the reduction should be applied to the headline sentence. He noted that the trial judge approached it “slightly differently”, but repeatedly referred - when reducing the headline by three years - to the fact that the defendant’s youth was the only significant mitigating factor she identified.

Umbelino did not accept the jury’s verdict and had lost any available credit for this, counsel noted. He said the court had taken mitigating factors into account.

Mr Justice Patrick McCarthy said the court would reserve judgment.

If you have been affected by any of the issues raised in this article, you can call the national 24-hour Rape Crisis Helpline at 1800-77 8888, access text service and webchat options at drcc.ie/services/helpline/ or visit Rape Crisis Help.