Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
A MAN WHO sexually assaulted his four young daughters in a “horror of a home” has been jailed for four and a half years.
Judge Patrick McCartan said that Mayo native Bernard Cunningham (66) has never shown any remorse for subjecting his children to “unspeakable mental and physical cruelty”.
Last April, a jury at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court returned unanimous guilty verdicts on eight charges of indecent and sexual assault committed between 1978 and 1992.
Cunningham of Royston, Kimmage Road West, Dublin had pleaded not guilty to the charges.
At his sentencing hearing Judge McCartan noted how Cunningham had met the case by instructing his lawyers to put it to his daughters that they were lying.
A “very violent man”
He noted the “absolute absence of any remorse” and said the victims had been subjected to the most protracted and careful probing during cross-examination of their testimony.
The women have waived their right to anonymity so that their father can be identified.
The eldest daughter, who was the first and youngest victim, was subjected to the most serious of abuse, the court heard.
Cunningham began abusing her in the late 70s when she was about five years old.
He took her into his bedroom and undressed himself and simulated sex between her legs until he climaxed.
The court heard that after these incidents Cunningham told the child he had made her happy and that it was their secret which nobody would understand.
This woman described her father as a “very violent man” and a “manipulative, powerful bully”.
She said he was a “street angel, house devil” who would brainwash people.
She told Gerardine Small BL, prosecuting, that Cunningham was “the nicest person to anyone looking in” but behind closed doors he was drinking heavily and would get great enjoyment out of seeing his daughter crying and making inappropriate comments when she was physically developing.
A number of references from Mayo people who know Cunningham and knew about his convictions described him as a kind and compassionate man.
Around 19 years ago he separated from his wife, the victims’ mother, and met his current partner and had been a father figure to his partner’s daughters, Tara Burns SC, defending, told the court.
His partner, who continues to support him, told the court that he was a kind man who cared for her dying brother.
Judge McCartan said that although the referees were well meaning, he could not marry their comments to the evidence of Cunningham’s cruelty.
He said the victims were reared in a “horror of a home” where because of their father’s drinking they were subjected to “sustained abuse, physical, mental and sexual”.
He said in the absence of one word of apology or remorse it was difficult to show the mercy that someone of his age might otherwise deserve.
One woman told the court that she had suffered from bulimia, self-harm and mental health problems as a result of the abuse.
Years of abuse
Burns told the court that her client had fought cancer recently but that the chemo and radiotherapy had left him with problems, including issues around ingestion of food and excessive saliva. She said there was a significant risk of a tumour recurrence.
She described him as a man on borrowed time.
Judge McCartan said this left it all the more remarkable that he had not had the “courage and the decency” to say that he was sorry.
Cunningham abused his first daughter on three occasions in the most serious of the offences between 1978 and 1979 at the family home in Dublin.
Some time in 1981 he molested his second daughter while travelling from Mayo to Dublin. This victim was aged seven. He also molested this girl six years later in their family home while her mother was in hospital.
On an unknown date in 1991 he molested his 14-year-old daughter in a caravan park in Co Wexford.
The final offending took place on two dates sometime in 1991 and 1992 when Cunningham twice molested his ten-year-old daughter. This girl raised the abuse with her mother in 1997 and her mother said she must have imagined it.
In victim impact reports one daughter said she had a monster for a father. She said all she wanted was an apology and an acknowledgement.
“Dad’s mission was to make me as miserable as possible,” she said.
She said the suggestion during the trial from Cunningham that she had organised the whole prosecution was “the final confirmation that what I was doing was the right thing to do”.
Another one of the victims said she now realised it wasn’t her fault because she was just a child.
Judge McCartan told the victims they were very brave and stated:
I’m deeply impressed. You never did any wrong.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
Drive 100km in any direction in an unmarked car any time any day and if you have a passenger you can play “Spot the Looney”. Another crash on the M50 last night. I don’t know how more innocent people are not killed on the Nàas Road. There are quite a few of these thick who seem to have no idea that the inside lane goes all the way to Nàas and back to Dublin. If someone wants to do 140km in the outside lane these idiots should not be forcing me and you out in front of them because they are holding up the centre lane. The answer is Traffic Corp out there driving the roads and pulling these people that are causing deaths off the road and at least warning them, not hiding behind a bush with a thing like a hair dryer to see if Clare Grade is 4mph over the limit. Either get these people to drive right on the road or get them off the road.
@Tom Fennelly: With 1 in 5 drugged up to the eyeballs according to the earlier journal item more roadside testing needs to be done as years of trying to encourage road safety nicely has obviously failed. Take the cars away from offenders and be done with it.
Agree with most of your comment but don’t understand what you mean by “forcing me and you in front of them” Can’t you just stay in the driving lane?
I’ll explain again so. Ok, imagine the inside lane is empty for a half mile in front of you. You are doing 80kmh on a 3 lane motorway. You drive up behind a looney in the centre lane and he is doing 70kmh in the centre lane when he should be in the inside lane (where you will go as well after you overtake) If he was in the correct lane, the inside lane you would not have to pull into the fast lane in front of a car doing 120kmh.
You may have missed the quiz here about 2 months ago when the question “When can you overtake on the left”? The answer was When traffic in the right hand lane is moving slower than the left. On motorways you can stay in the driving lane to pass hoggers. And you should never pull into the “fast lane” without yielding to traffic already in that lane. If caught you would be charged for committing the offence of careless driving or the more serious offence of dangerous driving. No such lane as fast lane, I assume you mean the overtaking lane(s).
Take the quiz again And, unless you have been on cloud cuckoo land there is nothing wrong with calling the outside lane, the overtaking lane, the lane nearest the central median the fast lane. You know the lane I mean You either agree or you don’t that those hogging the middle lane are the cause of accidents. I wish you luck overtaking on the inside and hope that a family after overtaking a hogger can see you coming up on the inside when they decide to pull into the inside lane. Anyone who thinks it’s safe to overtake on the inside of a 3 lane motorway at 100kph should have their lisence taken from them because at the speeds I quoted above that’s what you are suggesting people do. The fact remains, drivers hogging the middle lane are causing accidents and deaths and if you were on a motorway in England a police car with a nice “Follow Us” sign would pull you off the motorway. The point I make is that here, in places along 3 lane motorways the width of football fields there are speed traps at places with ridiculous speed limits while these idiots are free to cause accidents.
It’s not only the lane nearest to the central median, it’s ALL lanes other than the driving lane that are called the overtaking lanes. Secondly dangerous drivers like hoggers don’t cause “accidents”, they cause crashes. If the family overtakes the hogger then decide to move back into the inside lane it is not their’s but the drivers responsibility who’s duty is to drive with due care and attention. I know exactly what the law is in Ireland and the UK on lane hogging. I also know it is not an offence to stay in the driving lane to pass hoggers. Did you do the quiz? Look at question 5, it proves my point on nearside overtaking.
Ok. We will leave it there so. You know as you say all about the law in Ireland and “UK” Before you put on your know it all cap the answer to the quiz you refer to relates to “when it is safe to do so” mainly referring to passing while other motorists are making a right turn. I simply made a point about drivers hogging the middle lane and I don’t need the likes of you to explain to me that you know it all or do I need the likes of you to explain to me the difference between a crash and an accident. Keep passing by on motorways on the inside at 100kph and condone drivers causing a danger for the reasons I have stated.
This discussion is about the legality of passing on inside and not about if it’s safe to do so.. I also pointer out if you had read my next comment that you will be charged for weaving in and out of traffic. If the outside lanes are moving slower than the lane I use 90% of my driving on motorways I will pass on inside and I will not be at fault if the hogger pulls into my lane without yielding. If you don’t agree with my driving by saying I am causing danger then you are defending the hogger, or maybe you are a lane hogger. If you think undertaking is dangerous then you are saying it’s dangerous to overtake a left hand driven vehicle. Maybe you should keep off motorways and take alternative routes.
I’d certainly want to keep off motorways if mouths like you were driving in them anyway.
If come across many knowalls like you who just cannot accept facts. if you want to take the long way around best of luck to you but remember if you don’t yield to those already in that lane then it’s YOU who is at fault.
I am well aware about the yielding bit without YOU telling me. I gave up engaging with dimwits who operate under faceless false names on here. Bye. Safe driving – at least for those on the same road.
Is that the thanks I get for educating you. Bit of advice, get your facts right before you challenge those who know what their talking about. Tommy fast lane Fennelly.
We need remember there are 2 billion road journeys made each year in Ireland, the statistics are so infinitesimal you could never legislate risk out of the equation. Rises and falls have more to do with the Fibonachi scale of mathematics than anything else, you can’t eradicate risk out of any human endeavour and it perhaps foolish to believe otherwise. I’d much rather the RSA gave the money for thier resources towards mental heath issues, somewhere where it could be more effective. Having lost my father, yes one death is to many, nevertheless there is no accounting for pure accidents and pure mistakes and pure stupidity..
have your say