search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
SHAME SHAME


DUBLIN TAXI DRIVER FOUND GUILTY OF RAPING TWO YOUNG WOMEN IN BACK OF HIS CAB


A taxi driver who was described as preying on vulnerable young women, has been found guilty of two counts of rape and one of anal rape at the Central Criminal Court on Friday 14 June. Raymond Shorten, 50, from Clon- dalkin, Dublin, had denied raping two young women on separate nights in summer 2022. After deliberating for a total of 76 minutes the jury found him guilty of all three charges of rape by unanimous verdict. He was remanded in custody and will be sentenced on 1 July. The prosecution had described Shorten as “predatory” and said he had targeted vulnerable women who were drunk and trying to get home. Prosecuting counsel Gerardine Small described the man’s accounts of having con- sensual sex with each of the women as a “farce” and “ludicrous”. The court heard that both women had both been working, socialising and drinking in the city centre. The first incident took place in June 2022 and the second in August of that year. Both women found themselves in a taxi driven by the accused while on their way home from a night out and each said they were raped by him in the back of his taxi. In the witness box the first young woman, now aged 21, described herself as “very drunk” after drinking more alcohol than she would be used to and was drifting in and out of consciousness. The second young woman, also now aged 21, said she had been going on a night out with friends and the plan was to stay in her


PHTM JULY 2024


friend’s house. But after leaving a nightclub at around 2.30am she became separated from her friends and decided to go home. She said she was tired and quite drunk and could not remember if she had hailed a taxi or whether it had just stopped for her. She got into the back of the cab, told the taxi driver she wanted to go home, told him where she lived and then fell asleep. The next thing she remembered, she said, was waking up with the taxi driver on top of her. She realised that he was having sex with her and she said she turned her head away because she did not want him to kiss her. She said she was sore and in shock. She did not know how to fight back because she could not believe what was happening. In her closing speech, Ms Small told the jurors that consent to a sexual act must be free and voluntarily given. A person who was asleep or unconscious could not consent and if a person could not consent because of alcohol or drugs, then they were incapable of consent, Ms Small said.


Ms Small said the evidence of the two young women was compelling and there was no question that either of them consented to having sex with the man. It was unlikely that two young women who did not know each other would make similar accusations against the same man within six or seven weeks of each other, she added. Ms Small told the jury Shorten was a public service vehicle licence holder whose job was to get the two young women home. But she said that was not what he did. He preyed on vulnerabilities - and the fact that both girls were drunk and very sleepy, she said. Shorten told gardaí that in each case the interactions with the women were instigated by them and were consensual. The court heard defence evidence from three other women who said they had consensual sex with Shorten on other occasions in the back of his taxi. One of the women said she would never have had sex with him if she had been sober. Defence counsel Lorcan Staines told the jurors they were not there to decide on morals or whether the man’s behaviour was approp- riate but to decide on his guilt or innocence without emotion. To convict of rape, the jurors must be sure the man did not know the women were consenting or was reckless as to whether they were consenting or not, Mr Staines said. He told the jurors that a verdict of not guilty did not mean the man had acted appropriately or that he was a good man. All it meant is that they had a reasonable doubt.


49


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78