Local man ordered back to jail

Rosie Mullaley
Send to a friend

Send this article to a friend.

Supreme Court of Canada overturns N.L. Court of Appeal decision

Thomas Molloy. File photo

Canada’s highest court has ordered a child molester from this province back to jail.

The decision in the case of Thomas Leonard Molloy came down Tuesday in Ottawa.

It means Molloy must immediately begin serving the rest of his federal prison term.

The 51-year-old was found guilty in November 2010 of six

sexual offences — two counts each of sexual assault, touching for a sexual purpose and invitation to touching for a sexual purpose — following a trial at Newfoundland Supreme Court in St. John’s.

The sexual assaults occurred in the late 1990s in two different communities.

The complainant — who was between eight and 10 years old at the time and can’t be identified — was forced to perform oral sex and was molested by Molloy. In one incident, he attempted to perform anal sex on the child.

In February 2011, Justice James Adams sentenced Molloy to a three-year prison term. With six months given for pre-trial custody, it left 2 1/2 years on his term.

Less than a month later, Molloy appealed both the conviction and sentence. He was released on bail, pending appeal.

The appeal was heard March 7, 2011, and was argued by special prosecutions senior Crown Steve Dawson and Molloy’s lawyer at the time, Bob Buckingham.

A month later, the three-person Court of Appeal panel voted two-to-one to overturn the conviction and sentence.

A new trial was ordered.

At issue was the admissability of similar fact evidence at the trial — evidence introduced to demonstrate that Molloy had previously engaged in similar behaviour.

Some years before, he had been convicted of sexually assaulting another eight-year-old girl. In both incidents, the complainants were sexually assaulted while in close proximity to other people.

However, the N.L. Court of Appeal ruled that the previous incident was not similar enough to the more recent case.

“It could not be said that the accused had shown observed pattern of propensity with repeated conduct in a particular and highly specific situation,” Justice Malcolm Rowe wrote in the panel’s decision at that time.

“There was only one prior occurrence involving the accused.

“While there were similarities between what the accused did to the other girl and what he was alleged to have done to the complainant (in this case), it was not so distinctive as to constitute it a ‘calling card,’ ‘signature’ or ‘hallmark.’”

Rowe and Justice Gale Welsh agreed to overturn Adams’ decision, but there was one judge on the three-member panel who didn’t, Justice Lois Hoegg.

“I cannot agree with my colleagues that the trial judge erroneously admitted the similar fact evidence in this case,” she stated at the time.

“In my view, the trial judge correctly stated and applied the law. … There is no error in his approach or analysis. His decision to admit the similar fact evidence is deserving of deference and should stand.”

That was the basis of Dawson’s argument when he presented the case in front of the seven-member panel at the Supreme Court of Canada on Tuesday.

Defence lawyer Derek Hogan argued the case on behalf of Molloy.

The decision came almost immediately and was unanimous.

“We agree with (Justice) Hoegg dissenting at the (N.L.) Court of Appeal, that the trial judge committed no reviewable error. Therefore, the appeal is allowed,” said Madame Justice Marie Deschamps, who headed the panel.

As well, the panel agreed to drop one of the sexual assault charges, since it was considered redundant with the other charges.

But that didn’t change the sentence.

“We always thought Justice Hoegg had been correct which is why we felt so strongly bringing  it on appeal,” Dawson told The Telegram Thursday.

“It’s demonstrating a common theme in the Supreme Court of Canada and that is that trial judge’s decision should be given a great deal of deference,” he said.

“If it’s a decision that involves a balancing of factors, a weighing of factors, the trial judge is in a better position than an appeal panel, since the trial judge was there to hear all the evidence.

“So, if there’s no error in law, if he correctly interpreted the law, which he did, it shouldn’t be disturbed.”

It’s rare for cases from this province to be brought to the Supreme Court of Canada.

The last case was argued by recently appointed provincial court Judge Pam Goulding who, in March 2003 as senior Crown, argued the  murder case of Derrick Allen in Ottawa.

The decision on Molloy was a huge success for Dawson — particularly since it was his first time  appearing before the country’s highest court.

“It was very exciting,” he said.

“It certainly was a great experience for me.”


Twitter: @TelyCourt

Organizations: Supreme Court of Canada, N.L. Court, Supreme Court of Canada.The

Geographic location: Canada, Ottawa.It

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page



Recent comments

  • Marg
    February 17, 2012 - 12:49

    Edmund, Maybe some of the prisoners will "castrate" him. It's beyond my comprehension how a big grown man can even think about hurting a child, especially sexually. My heavens, how totally utterly sickening. Like someone else stated, they are scared for life.

  • Edmund
    February 17, 2012 - 12:12

    One may wonder what way Rowe and Welsh would have ruled if it had been one of their family members that was assaulted by this freak. Hats off to Judge Hoegg for her total understanding of the law and situation at hand and the others that saw right through this criminal and upheld the guilty decision. Too bad it did not happen sooner to save our tax dollars being spent on this coward's abuse of court time. He is, as has been proven, a low life child molester and they should castrate him in public as his sentence so it does not happen when he gets out and to deter others, like him, that live in our society.

  • He Has More rights Than His Victims
    February 17, 2012 - 10:57

    Ruin the innocence of a child and scar the child for life so this pervert can have his 30 seconds of jollies. Something very wrong wrong with our justice system.

  • cathy
    February 17, 2012 - 09:16

    Too bad they cant throw away the key....three years seems a pretty short time for a molestation charge,,,,

    • Jessica
      February 17, 2012 - 20:10

      We live in a sad society where sex offenders get nothing but a slap on the wrists. Its a miracle he got sentenced with jail time, and not just "probation".

  • Wanda
    February 17, 2012 - 09:02

    Why this case even got so far as the Supreme Court of Canada is beyond me. From all the evidence (and I know people from his community), Molloy is more than a middle-aged pervert who did horrendous things to helpless young innocent children. Their lives are ruined forever. What a price to pay for a pervert's selfish despicable actions.

  • Marg
    February 17, 2012 - 08:21

    What another great waste of taxpayer's money. Molloy got what he deserves. There's nothing as low as a CHILD sexual molester or abuser.

  • Carol Ann Rogers
    February 17, 2012 - 07:18

    Good job! Well done.

    • Thomas A Molloy
      February 17, 2012 - 15:36

      Make no mistake that my name is Thomas A.Molloy not the one who was convicted of this horrendous crime, I am the father of a daughter who was molested by this usless piece of piece of piece of shit my daughter was six years old at the time of these incidentes while the so called justice system decided that too much time had elasped to convict the bastard, but if it was me for murder there would be no limit on this, this shit was living in our small community for six months while a taxpayers lawyer was trying to get him off,if I need a laywer I have to pay out out of pocket there should be no statute of limittions on these crimes, there is no limitations on how my daughters feelings are, this guys family history goes back even to me,we have to st and up and get rid of these people and their relatives who do these things, after all years ago the thing was things were to keep quiet.