Retired Defence Forces member jailed for grooming and sexually abusing two young girls in 1980s
Eddie Lillis was jailed for three and half years at Limerick Circuit Criminal Court.
He had denied sexually abusing the two girls, who were aged between three and eight, when he groomed and abused them in the 1980s.
Judge Colin Daly lifted a court order restricting the media from identifying Lillis, (63), of Shannonvale, Old Cratloe Road, Limerick.
Shortly after Lillis sexually assaulted his first victim, Girl A, she told her mother what happened and gave a formal statement to gardaí.
However the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) at the time directed there was not enough evidence to prosecute Lillis.
Lillis went on to abuse Girl B, the court heard.
Four decades later in 2020, after Girl A made another complaint and gardaí received a separate complaint from Lillis' second victim, Girl B, gardaí re-investigated the case and the DPP ordered Lillis to face trial.
Lillis pleaded not guilty to all of the charges.
Following his trial at Limerick Circuit Criminal Court, he was convicted on four of the five charges, and the jury could not reach a decision on the fifth count.
In her victim impact statement which she read in court, Girl A stated: 'If Eddie Lillis had been held accountable when I made my original complaint, (Girl B) may have avoided his depraved actions.
'My hope is that by making his crimes known to the public Eddie Lillis will never have the opportunity to harm another child.'
Both women said they came forward to gardaí to 'protect other little girls' from Lillis, or indeed, any other 'paedophile'.
Advertisement
They said they wanted to show 'other victims of historic sexual abuse that it is never too late to pursue justice'.
Lillis, who was supported in court by some of his family, said through his barrister that despite him having contested the trial, he accepted the jury's decision.
Girl A stated that the 'heinous' sex acts carried out on her by Lillis changed her from being 'a carefree, innocent six-year old little girl, to feeling confused and terrified'.
'The person who hurt me was someone who was supposed to protect and serve our community.
'Instead, he took advantage of my innocence and vulnerability.'
Girl A, who was sexually assaulted by Lillis a few days prior her First Holy Communion, praised her parents 'who instantly believed me and brought me to make a statement to gardaí'.
She said she continued to struggle afterwards with anxiety knowing 'that there are many more Eddie Lillis's out there'.
'He is now a convicted paedophile, I am relieved that my allegations were finally taken seriously by the DPP and that (the defendant) is being held to account,' Girl A concluded.
Girl B told the court that, Lillis's sexual assaults on her had 'warped' her childhood, and that 'despite extensive and ongoing therapy, the psychological scars never go away.'
Girl B said the abuse made her fearful for her own daughter and 'all little girls because of men like Edward Lillis', and that her fear for other children convinced her 'to come forward once and for all'.
'He (Lillis) maintained his innocence and put my family and I through the further trauma of a trial, he has never shown a midget of remorse.'
Neither victim wished to be identified but they said they supported the court lifting reporting restrictions on identifying Lillis.
Lillis' barrister, senior counsel, Anthony Salmon, asked Judge Colin Daly to take into account Lillis's 'service to the State, and his previous good character until his convictions caught up with him'.
Jailing Lillis, Judge Daly said the married father of three, 'took advantage' of his position of trust in the community 'to abuse the two children'.
Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article.
Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation.
Learn More
Support The Journal
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
9 hours ago
- Irish Times
Defence Forces lost ammunition for six months, sparking garda theft inquiry, documents show
The Defence Forces was unable to locate a bag of high-calibre rounds, seized as part of an investigation into the alleged theft of military property by an Army officer, for several months, according to official documents. The apparent loss of the ammunition in 2022 sparked a major Garda investigation and a search operation in Co Kilkenny due to fears it may have fallen into criminal hands. The ammunition was located six months later in a secure area, close to where it had been originally stored. Despite this, the officer originally accused of misappropriating the ammunition was later sent forward for court martial on various charges. However, these charges were subsequently dropped by military prosecutors. READ MORE The Defence Forces attributed the incident to an inadvertent error. Sources said the ammunition never left the secure storage area used to keep live rounds. The sequence of events is detailed in a series of official documents seen by The Irish Times and corroborated with military sources. The investigation into the officer began in 2021 when he was accused of a range of offences relating to improper possession of mostly historical military equipment, including rounds of .303 ammunition. This type of ammunition is no longer in use in the Defence Forces but has historical value and is still commonly used in civilian hunting rifles. The accusations against the officer related to equipment that was stored on military property and never left the base. During their investigation, military police enlisted the help of gardaí who searched the officer's home but found nothing. As part of their investigation, military police seized 129 rounds of .303 ammunition from Defence Forces stores as evidence. The rounds were divided into three bags. In December 2021, they were taken by a military transport to a secure storage facility in Stephens Barracks in Kilkenny. In February 2022, the evidence was moved to another secure storage area due to construction works. Later that month, a senior officer directed that the bullets should be transferred into steel boxes. Staff began to do this the following April while at the same time doing a routine check of the ammunition. At this point it was realised that one bag of ammunition was missing. Senior officers were alerted, as was the superintendent in Kilkenny Garda station, per standard procedure. The base was searched without success and a Garda detective sergeant was assigned to led a team to investigate 'the theft of ammunition' from the barracks, according to an official document. The Garda investigation looked into civilian construction workers who were on the base at the time as well as external security staff who were also on site. However, nothing suspicious was uncovered in relation to their presence. Investigators also examined the CCTV system at the base, which they were told had been damaged roughly around the time the missing ammunition was first noticed. One Defence Forces member told gardaí that in the weeks before the missing ammunition was first noticed, an issue was found with the system. According to an official report, clothes pegs had been inserted into the rear of the hard drive that records the CCTV footage in what an official said appeared to be an attempt to stop its cooling fans from working. In November 2022, the ammunition was located in a loosely tied sandbag. A staff member told investigators they believed they had inadvertently placed the ammunition in the sandbag during a routine inspection earlier in the year. In July of last year, days before his court martial was due to begin, the officer at the centre of the original investigation was informed the evidence had been missing for at least six months before being located. When the case began, the prosecution said it had difficultly in proceeding with the charges. Ultimately, the officer agreed to plead guilty to a single summary charge relating to the recording of historical equipment in military stores. The judge described it as a 'disciplinary matter' and fined the man three days pay. The officer was later promoted to a senior rank before retiring in good standing. A Defence Forces spokesman said it 'would be inappropriate for the Defence Forces to comment on the details of specific Military Police investigations'.
Sunday World
13 hours ago
- Sunday World
Man accused of threatening to burn woman's home down released on bail
Garda Liam Finn objected to bail due to the nature of the case A labourer accused of threatening to burn his female housemate's Dublin home down has been released on bail pending possible extra charges. Valentin Ursachi, 41, formerly of Park Boulevard, Tyrrelstown, Dublin 15, was charged with making a threat to damage the woman's residence in a way likely to endanger her life during the alleged incident on Friday. He appeared before Judge John Brennan at Dublin District Court yesterday. Garda Liam Finn objected to bail due to the nature of the case, alleging "he threatened to burn his housemate's house down," and he added that further charges were "most likely". However, in subsequent exchanges with defence solicitor Tracy Horan, he agreed that the imposition of specific conditions would allay his fears. Dressed in a cream jacket, white trousers, and a navy and beige top, Mr Ursachi, who did not address the court, listened to the proceedings with the aid of a Romanian interpreter. Judge Brennan ordered him to stay away from the property, surrender his passport within two hours of release, and not apply for replacement travel documents. He was also instructed to have no contact with the complainant and to sign on once a week at a Garda station. The complainant was not required to attend or give evidence at the bail hearing. Legal aid was granted after Ms Horan submitted a statement of her client's means and told the court that the man was working on minimum wage. He must appear again on September 19 for the DPP's directions to be conveyed and possible further charges.
Sunday World
13 hours ago
- Sunday World
Enoch Burke sister Jemima left without compensation despite quashing of conviction
The finding was made in judicial review proceedings brought by Ms Burke (30) after she was arrested, charged and convicted within a matter of hours A sister of controversial teacher Enoch Burke will not be awarded damages despite a ruling quashing her conviction for a public order offence. Jemima Burke was not afforded fair trial rights when she was convicted at Ballina District Court in Co Mayo on June 20 last year, the High Court found. The finding was made in judicial review proceedings brought by Ms Burke (30) after she was arrested, charged and convicted within a matter of hours. The DPP did not oppose the quashing of the conviction but had sought to have the case remitted for a re-hearing before a different district court judge. However, Ms Justice Sara Phelan did not consider it appropriate to do so. The judge also did not consider an award of damages to be necessary or appropriate. Ms Burke had been convicted and fined €350 under Section 6 of the Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act 1994, which makes it an offence for a person in a public place to use or engage in any threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour with intent to provoke a breach of the peace or being reckless as to whether a breach of the peace may be occasioned. She used her phone to film the coroner and several staff from Mayo University Hospital Her arrest and conviction came after she attended an inquest in Swinford, Co Mayo. During the inquest lunch break, while outside on the public street, she used her phone to film the coroner and several staff from Mayo University Hospital. Ms Burke was arrested by a garda. She was taken to Ballina garda station, detained in a cell, and then taken to the district court, where her case was heard immediately after she refused to sign a bail bond. Ms Justice Phelan said it appeared the district court judge was of the view that it was in Ms Burke's best interests to have the trial immediately. This was because if she was to be remanded in custody pending her trial, the ultimate penalty was unlikely to be a custodial sentence equal to or longer than the remand period. But Ms Justice Phelan said it was evident the minimum requirements of a fair trial had not been met. Ms Burke was not afforded time to prepare her defence, for example, by way of considering whether to engage legal representation, request disclosure, ascertain if CCTV footage was available, review mobile phone footage, or ascertain if there were witnesses available.
