A GAA coach who “destroyed” the life of the boy he raped has been refused permission by the Supreme Court to appeal against a four-year increase in his sentence for what a judge said were “unusual, shocking and extremely disturbing”.

At the Central Criminal Court in December 2021, the man, who cannot be identified to protect the victim’s identity, was sentenced to 10-and-a-half years in prison, with the last 18 months suspended by Mr Justice Michael MacGrath.

On the day he was due to stand trial in April 2021, the man (43) pleaded guilty to 15 counts, including oral rape, attempted anal rape, sexual assault, false imprisonment, assault causing injury and criminal damage. The court heard evidence of other sexual assaults during a trip to London, but those charges were dropped as they took place outside the jurisdiction.

The offenses took place at locations including the man’s home, a sports ground in the Midlands and a hotel in Dublin.

The Central Criminal Court heard the man was extradited from the US to face the charges.

At the Court of Appeal in March, Eilis Brennan SC, for the State, who argued the sentence was too low, said the victim had suffered “ongoing” sexual and physical abuse as well as “emotional torture” over a six-year period years. . She told the court the nine-year sentence did not reflect the “destroy” of a young man’s life.

Ms Brennan said the child was subjected to multiple rapes and sexual assaults that began when he was 13 and continued until he was 15. She said the victim’s “ongoing” harassment involved “domination, control and humiliation” and that the injured party “felt he had to leave college because he was being destroyed at every turn and eventually had to give up.”

Following the application, the Court of Appeal increased the original sentence to 14 years and six months, with the final 18 months suspended, with Ms Justice Tara Burns finding that the sentencing judge had not properly taken into account the “overall gravity” of the offence. .

Mrs Justice Burns said the case involved repeated sexual offenses compounded by a series of humiliating physical assaults and a wider campaign of harassment.

The judge described the offense as “unusual, shocking and extremely disturbing”. She added: “The injured person, a child for almost all of the offences, and a young man trying to make his way in the world at the conclusion of the offence, was treated in a manner lacking in humanity, morality and respect.”

The Supreme Court noted that the man’s appeal of the increased sentence concerned a case involving 30 counts of oral rape, 37 counts of sexual assault, one count of attempted oral rape, false imprisonment, assault causing injury and criminal damage.

The accused pleaded guilty to 15 counts, with consent for the facts of all offenses to be considered as part of the sentencing process.

The accused had argued in his application to the Supreme Court that he was in the lower band for sexually violent offences, that the delays in the case constituted an injustice and that there were issues of consent and the age of the victim.

In refusing leave to appeal against the enhanced sentence, Mr Justice Peter Charleton, Mr Justice Maurice Collins and Ms Justice Aileen Donnelly said the Court of Appeal had carried out a “thorough examination of the facts” to assess the seriousness of the offense and acknowledged delays in the case.

Supreme Court judges said there was “nothing” to suggest any law had been misapplied in a “difficult case which was sensitively considered” and that the appropriate adjustment of sentence had been properly made.