An outline of evidence given by the former JMSE director Mr Gabriel Grehan to the tribunal's legal team through his solicitor contained "significant differences" to an earlier disclosure made by him directly, the tribunal heard.
Mr Patrick Hanratty SC, for the tribunal, said he interviewed Mr Grehan with fellow tribunal lawyer Mr Des O'Neill SC on November 30th last. Mr Hanratty said he drafted a memorandum based on the interview which formed the basis of a draft statement to be given by Mr Grehan in evidence.
However, when presented with the draft statement, Mr Grehan said he wished to consult his solicitor. The solicitor then forwarded an outline of evidence to the tribunal which contained a number of "major differences" from the draft statement, Mr Hanratty said.
Mr Grehan's draft statement was read into evidence. It said Mr Grehan was aware in 1989 it was Mr Joseph Murphy snr's intention to sell off development lands held by the company. "The motivation for this seemed to be the litigation either threatened or being commenced by the former chief executive, Liam Conroy."
It said it was Mr Grehan's understanding and "the general understanding" in JMSE that monies had been paid to Mr Ray Burke and planning permission had been granted in return. The statement continued: "I was told by John Maher some months after the transaction that £30,000 had left the JMSE accounts but that a similar amount had been lodged to the company accounts shortly afterwards and since the entire beneficial ownership of the companies was vested in the Murphys, I saw no reason to question further the nature of this transaction."
It was Mr Grehan's understanding that Mr Frank Reynolds and Mr Tim O'Keefe, an employee of the JMSE accountant, Mr Roger Copsey, "went to the bank and collected £30,000 in cash. I understand there may have been an additional payment by cheque of £10,000 but I believe that the cheque could not be located. My understanding was that this payment, whether it be £30,000 or £40,000, was matched by a similar payment from Bailey/Bovale, and that the purpose of this payment was to ensure that planning permission was granted in respect of the development of the lands being purchased by Michael Bailey."
Mr Grehan's draft statement continued: "At no time was it ever suggested to me that James Gogarty was acting on a frolic of his own in paying monies to Ray Burke . . . I would say it was highly unlikely that James Gogarty would have made a payment over of cash to Ray Burke unless some other party was present. I cannot say who was present at the time but I understood that it was Joseph Murphy snr."
In the draft statement, Mr Grehan said he "found James Gogarty to be astute and accurate in his recall of events". Mr Grehan said he was aware Mr Gogarty was asked to sign the company's 1998 accounts and had reservations about doing so. He was also asked to sign and refused, he said.
Mr Hanratty said he read through the draft statement with Mr Grehan and his wife at a meeting at their house on December 21st last. Mr Grehan was in agreement with the statement except for the section which referred to Mr Murphy snr attending the meeting with Mr Burke, Mr Hanratty said. He was not sufficiently sure about this.
Mr Grehan said he wished to think about the statement overnight. When Mr Hanratty phoned him the following day, Mr Grehan said he wished to consult his solicitor. Mr Hanratty told Mr Grehan he would call him on January 5th and in the meantime would serve a summons for him to be called as a witness to the tribunal.
Mr Grehan subsequently asked that all further contact be made through his solicitor. Mr Grehan's solicitor sent the outline of evidence to the tribunal shortly after direct contact had ceased. This outline was subsequently contested by the tribunal's legal team in correspondence with Mr Grehan's solicitor.
Mr Hanratty stressed that the draft statement had been based entirely on his interview with Mr Grehan. However, he noted that the phrase "frolic of his own" had come from either him or Mr O'Neill. It was shorthand used by the tribunal legal team to describe the Murphy defence that Mr Gogarty was acting on his own in relation to the £30,000 payment.
