Closing arguments heard in soldier’s trial

A court martial board is to begin deliberations today in a case where a soldier accused of sexual assault has claimed his behaviour was affected by the anti-malaria drug Lariam. In final submissions yesterday, Cmdt Fintan McCarthy, prosecuting, said it was a clear case of intentional sexual assault.

Cmdt McCarthy said the soldier , dressed only in his underwear, had emerged silently and in the dark, from what the victim had called a “creaky old army bed” and crossed the room to “invade the bed space” of his victim.

Cmdt McCarthy said the accused had moved with the deliberation and agility of a cat, lowering himself into a hunched position and placing his hand on his female colleague’s bottom. Cmdt McCarthy said his moves were clearly not aimed at finding the light switch and were the actions of someone who intended to carry out a sexual assault.

He recalled medical evidence that the soldier had never complained of malaria intolerance while overseas – and on the last trip some 11 months before the alleged assault, the evidence was that he had done his job well.

Cmdt McCarthy said he had sought medical help for the side effects of Lariam only after the alleged sexual assault, and there was no causal link between Lariam and the alleged assault.

However, Gareth Humphreys, defending, said the accused had consistently said he did not know what happened during the alleged assault. He said his client had repeatedly said he did not know what happened and when asked if he had been sleepwalking, had declined this explanation, answering honestly that he did not know.

Mr Humphreys said the accused had told military police he did not know what he was doing in his boxer shorts near the alleged victim’s bed, and had voluntarily gone into the witness box to repeat that he did not know what he had been doing. He said the opinion of the prosecution’s medical witness, who said there would be no side effects of Lariam three months after dosage, had been rejected by a defence specialist.

The drug distributor Roche Products used the phrase “several months” in relation to serious side effects and the US military said ill-effects could be “permanent”. He said the accused soldier was entitled to rely on the defence that he was affected by Lariam and the burden of proof was on the prosecution.