The trial of Rev William James Stewart at the Bridewell, District Court, on Friday 14 Jan 2005.

Report of the trial of Rev William James Stewart at the Bridewell, District Court, on Friday 14 January 2005.

[Dialogue Ireland had represented the family of the victim of this case since Feb 2004. When news came to us that Rev William James Stewart had been instituted  at Loddon in the Chet Valley group of villages this became the trigger for posting the court case. There is widespread ignorance of the true circumstances of what happened in Core both before and after this case. If you were to google the Rev William James Stewart nothing would come up. The normal opprobrium which attends a sentence of this type just did not result and emboldened some to think they could act as if nothing had happened. We will return to the role of the Church of Ireland, The Church of England and Core Church meeting at St Catherine's, Thomas Street  in later posts. We will also facilitate any statements or comments these bodies may wish to make.]

Late on the night of Wednesday 12 Jan I received a call from xxxxxxxxxx requesting me to join her for the trial. I also received an email from xxxxxxx her son asking me to attend in support of his mother, as he was doing final exams on that day, and also to be an independent observer for Dialogue Ireland.

We met for a brief bite to eat and xxxxxxx was quite nervous and was not quite sure Willi would hold to his plea of guilty. Also she was concerned that it would not drag out.

We went to Court 44, but there was no mention of the case, but after a few minutes we were moved to another court and then we could not see any sign of Willi anywhere. First there was a case of a woman accused of using a bag with a false bottom and tin foil used to avoid the sensors going off in Brown Thomas who was found guilty and fined €500.

Then suddenly out of the bowels of the court and from the cells below a James Stewart was brought up. He was obviously not his usual extrovert self as he stared vacantly into some mid point in the courtroom looking neither to the left or to the right. Before the charges were read out it was clear we might face a major delay. The prosecution acknowledged that the dates on the DPP’s warrant were incorrect. Normally this would have led to an adjournment while this was rectified, but both parties wanted closure for different reasons and after a break the case was resumed. Also in court was the former Archdeacon of Dublin, Gordon Linney whose character reference was to have a major influence on the sentencing outcome of the court. Also representing the Archbishop, David Pierrepoint, the new Archdeacon. Prior to the proceedings taking place it was clear that the victim would not be present in court due to his final exams and the prosecuting side and the defence agreed that there would be no victim impact statement as long as Willi maintained his guilty plea. As Willi was pleading guilty and the sentence would be widely reported he saw no reason to be present. This would impact the judgement for reasons that will become clear later.

The prosecuting Garda gave evidence of arresting Rev William James Stewart that morning and charging him under the Criminal law (rape amended) act 1990, as amended by section 37 of the sexual offenders act 2001. At first one would not have known that the case was against Willi Stewart, as the name James Stewart was used, but as the proceedings advanced his full name and title were clearly stated. Rev William James Stewart. The arresting officer stated that she had interviewed the victim on April 22, 2004 and taken a statement. She also interviewed Willi on April 24 and he pleaded guilty. Willi, who is 46 years of age, was then resident at 96 Lr Drumcondra Road, the rectory for Core Church.

While the victim  was asleep having decided to stay overnight. He awoke to find Willi manipulating his penis. He was 20 years old at the time.

Willi pleaded guilty to the charge. The Judge then raised the issue of a witness impact statement and was told that the family and the victim did not want to exercise his right in this area. xxxxxxx the mother of the victim  was invited to give a summary of her reflections. She explained her son was doing his final exams and did not want to make a statement as long as Willi had pleaded guilty which he had done. The issue was about a breach of trust and the victim  had gone through a difficult time. The judge asked if he was able to do his studies and had he been able to have a girl friend. To this she replied that he had. He had had some counselling, but required further help. She also went onto say that she was also concerned for the Stewart family. The judge commended her for concern for the other family.

Before going out to consider his verdict he made allusion to an Andrea Wigglesworth who had counselled with him following this incident. She indicated that he was indeed remorseful. She gave the impression that this was a once off aberration, rather than a consistent pattern. He also mentioned that he had submitted to the direction of Bishop Salmon of South Carolina, Steve Wood and a William Rett a psychologist. He had also submitted to the jurisdiction of the court in returning from the USA. Then his former rector and the former archdeacon of Dublin, Gordon Linney stepped forward as a character witness. He said, he had known Willi for over twenty years and this was totally out of character with the person he knew. In fact, he categorised this incident as a once off, moment of madness.

Justice Dunne then adjourned the court to consider the evidence and to pass sentence.

He then delivered his verdict: This was a tragedy for the family, friends and church community. The preference of the court would have been to have the victim present. He commended him for having informed his superiors in the church and for having made a public statement to his congregation. He also pleaded guilty and made arrangements to go to the States for rehabilitation.

He then went on to say that there were two functions that featured in arriving at a sentence, justice and law. These two strands do not necessarily meet. This was according to testimony an out of character experience. His remorse is genuine. It has cost him his ministry and he will be professionally exiled. He had been personally humiliated, and before his friends, community and church community.  This was a terrible fall from grace and it has resulted in permanent exile. He then commended Mrs xxxxxx for her concern for the Stewart family.

He then stated that there had been goodness in ministry, and care for the underprivileged. Looking at the broad canvass one had to take into account the dispensing of the right to give a victim impact statement and also because it was just one moment of madness, he found Willi guilty and applied the probation act Section 1. You made a serious error. The result of this is that Willi will be able to leave this jurisdiction without a criminal record, which would have been impossible if he had received a custodial sentence.

Advertisement