Ex-principal bailed on child-sex offences, weeks after guilty verdict

An ex-school principal and Catholic brother has been granted bail by a Supreme Court judge just two weeks after being convicted by a jury of shocking historical sexual abuse against a child.

Desmond Mackrell outside of the Brisbane Supreme Court. Picture: John Gass

An ex-school principal and Catholic brother has been granted bail by a Supreme Court judge just two weeks after being convicted by a jury of shocking historical sexual abuse against a child.

Desmond Mackrell, also known as Brother Bede, faced trial in late March accused of “vile” sexual offending against a teenager more than forty years ago while Mackrell was a school principal.

Mackrell, now 90, was found guilty of repeated sexual conduct with a child and two counts of carnal knowledge against the order of nature.

However, he was found not guilty of one count of carnal knowledge and also of one count of indecent treatment of a boy under 17 – the latter of which the trial Judge Farr had instructed the jury to enter a not-guilty verdict for.

Mackrell was sentenced to seven years in jail, with parole eligibility after serving half, but has since lodged an appeal – which has been expedited by the prosecution.

At a bail application on Friday, defence barrister Tim Ryan KC argued his client should be released prior to the appeal, saying there were “strong prospects” that the convictions would be overturned.

He said the complainant’s evidence was “tainted” by the fact he had testified that his memories of the abuse had only been triggered after experiencing dreams and nightmares as an adult.

“The more dreams and nightmares he had, the more real they seemed,” Mr Ryan said.

He also pointed out some “inconsistencies or discrepancies” in the victim’s account of some of the events at trial.

Reviewing the evidence, Justice Lincoln Crowley noted that when the victim initially went to police in 2022, he only had “shards of memories” relating to sexual abuse from another teacher, not Mackrell.

“He accepted that they were not complete memories but they developed over time,” Justice Crowley said.

“ … Over time through the dreams and nightmares that he had, his memories developed to the point where he was able to identify the applicant (Mackrell) as one of the offenders.”

Justice Crowley said the way in which the allegations occurred were a substantial point to consider at appeal.

Crown prosecutor Michael Lehane argued that when the victim had been questioned at trial, he had been adamant that Mackrell had abused him.

The victim had responded “I know what he did, I know what happened to me that day,” Mr Lehane said.

He acknowledged there may be some arguable points, but said the outcome of the appeal was still “by no means clear”.

Mr Ryan said the jury may have been convinced that the victim genuinely believed he had been abused by Mackrell, but said the reliability of his evidence was still in question.

Despite the appeal being expedited, Mr Ryan argued that any time in custody would still be onerous due to Mackrell’s age and multiple health conditions including cancer – which he could not access all of his medications for while incarcerated.

Justice Crowley decided to grant Mackrell bail, agreeing with Mr Ryan that there were exceptional circumstances demonstrated.

He said he considered there to be “strong grounds” to conclude the appeal would be allowed, and that at 90 years old, the time Mackrell would otherwise have to wait in custody was significant.

Mackrell was granted bail, with his appeal expected to be heard in June.