A judge has taken the decision to issue what is known as a ‘McAleenan Warning’ after criticising the lack of progress in the case of attempted child sexual communication offences following detection through an online protection group.
A McAleenan Warning is a formal instruction from a judge compelling the prosecution to meet a specified deadline in a case that has been delayed and when enough time has been afforded.
The case in question relates to 67-year-old Paul Stansfield from Main Street, Ballygawley who was confronted in his home on behalf of another group based in England, is charged with intentionally attempting to communicate with a 13-year-old child on August 14 last year for the purpose of obtaining sexual gratification and encouraging her to make a sexual communication.
A police officer previously told Dungannon Magistrates’ Court Stansfield allegedly requested indecent images from the child, which was discovered when a relative checked her phone and raised the alarm.
Bail was not opposed on condition Stansfield reside at an address approved by police and have no unsupervised contact with any child aged under 18 nor possess any internet-capable device.
However due to being unable to obtain an alternative address he has remained in custody ever since and a defence barrister said he has now served more than the equivalent if he had been convicted and sentenced.
It was originally contended the delay had been caused by Stansfield refusing to provide the access codes for his phones which is hampering forensic officers in their efforts to extract the data.
It was later confirmed the phones were accessed but more issues arose around categorising images found on them.
The case was adjourned on a number of further occasions and there remained issues with progress which led District Judge Francis Rafferty to enquire what exactly was holding matters up.
At the most recent court sitting a prosecuting lawyer said there was no substantive update other than the matter would be moving to crown court and a further four week adjournment was required.
A defence barrister said, “As I have repeatedly raised before, this case is utterly simple. It’s going to proceed by guilty plea and that was indicated to the PPS at a very early stage. This is not complicated. There was communication which has been accepted.”
He continued, “It’s now over a year now. The defendant cannot get released because his family will not accommodate him because of the nature of the offences and the media attention it attracted. These offences may not attract immediate imprisonment, yet the PPS continue to ask for more time.”
The defence suggested the matter had reached the point where a McAleenan Warning was appropriate.
Following consideration Judge Rafferty agreed and issued the warning, which means the prosecution have until 24 September to have the case ready to transfer to crown court for trial.
Stansfield was remanded in continuing custody.
