Judge says article badly upset Gogarty

Mr James Gogarty had apparently suffered a very severe nervous upset over an article which appeared in the Sunday Times, and …

Mr James Gogarty had apparently suffered a very severe nervous upset over an article which appeared in the Sunday Times, and the tribunal would adjourn further hearing of his evidence until next Monday, the chairman ruled yesterday.

He said the article was yet another unauthorised disclosure of confidential information, and "the timing of this disclosure is remarkable". He would be bringing the article to the attention of the Garda, which was already investigating leaks. Mr Colm Allen SC, for the Baileys and Bovale Ltd, was to have started cross-examination of Mr Gogarty yesterday. However, Mr Frank Callanan SC, for Mr Gogarty, said a matter of extreme significance had occurred in the previous day's Sunday Times.

He said the article contained the contents of a statement made by Mr Michael O'Sullivan (a former chief engineer at Moneypoint). The article, written by Ursula Halligan, was on the front page with the headline: "Gogarty `wanted men to be shot'."

Mr Callanan told the tribunal: "The leaking of this statement has been acutely distressing to Mr Gogarty and has caused him very considerable upset and has effectively denied him his night's sleep."

READ MORE

The leak had occurred at an extremely sensitive part in his evidence. It raised concerns as to its source.

Regarding the article, Mr Gogarty had nothing whatever to hide concerning Moneypoint or any of the contents of Mr O'Sullivan's statement and he would be happy to deal with the allegations against him in their entirety.

Mr Callanan said he was seeking an investigation into the leak and was anxious to ascertain the position concerning investigations into other leaks, as they may have come from the same source.

He was also applying for Mr O'Sullivan's statement in its entirety to be read into the record of the tribunal in the light of an "utterly partisan publication" of a version of the statement.

"Mr Gogarty has from the outset asserted that both the affidavit by Mr Liam Conroy [former JMSE chief executive] and a disciplinary ruling against Mr Roger Copsey [former JMSE financial controller] are central to the matter into which the tribunal is inquiring," he said.

To date, no ruling of the tribunal had allowed either of these to be admitted, Mr Callanan said.

Mr Garrett Cooney SC, for JMSE, said they knew nothing about the leak's source. No story should affect a ruling. The basis of their objection to the admission of Mr Conroy's affidavit was that the man was dead and so his evidence could not be challenged. His clients disputed the many allegations set out in the affidavit.

Mr Allen said neither Mr Thomas Bailey nor Mr Michael Bailey had ever seen the affidavit in question or had a copy of it in their possession. Neither he (Mr Allen) or any member of the legal team, barristers or solicitors, had anything whatever to do with the leak. Mr Pat Heneghan (public relations consultant) had never had sight of the document.

Mr Callanan said he was applying to have the resumption of Mr Gogarty's cross-examination put back until Friday. He said he did not think it appropriate for his cross-examination to take place under conditions of excessive stress. "For anybody to be accused of wanting men to be shot was particularly calculated to provoke and distress them."

The chairman said Mr Gogarty was a man of very mature years. Being at the tribunal itself was a serious strain on him, and this was aggravated by the article. He would adjourn Mr Gogarty's evidence until Monday next. He would deal with the submissions on the Conroy and Copsey documents in private on Friday.