The Court of Criminal Appeal will rule today on a bid by former assistant Dublin city and county manager George Redmond to be allowed call new evidence - bank records of garage owner Mr Brendan Fassnidge - in Redmond's appeal against his conviction for corruption.
Redmond claims the documents do not appear to support Mr Fassnidge's allegation that Redmond had accepted a £10,000 bribe in the 1980s from Mr Fassnidge regarding the sale of a right of way at Palmerstown from the former Dublin County Council.
Redmond (80) was jailed for 12 months on December 19th last after being found guilty by Dublin Circuit Criminal Court of accepting that bribe. The sentence was backdated to November 19th last.
The court yesterday rejected an application by Redmond for State legal aid for his appeal, saying it was satisfied that he had sufficient means. Redmond said he received a pension of €1,585 every two weeks, out of which he supported himself and his wife and such legal costs as he had to bear to date. He and his wife had a joint account in EBS into which his pension was paid. He thought there might be €20-30,000 in the account.
To date, he had funded his own legal defence and had other expenses at the planning tribunal going back to 1998. After a short period, he could not pay lawyers up front. He dispensed with lawyers in the present module and was appearing on his own behalf.
Asked by his counsel Mr Brendan Grehan SC how much he owed, Redmond said he thought the figure was some €150,000 (to another family member).
He was expecting to have got a refund from the tribunal and was going into another module of the tribunal in the autumn.
He had paid legal fees in the expectation that they would be refunded. His wife had paid his legal fees for the criminal trial.
A Criminal Assets Bureau (CAB) officer said he thought a pension of €41,210 was "appropriate" for Redmond. In 1999 Redmond would have owned an apartment at Fitzwilliam Court, he added. Under cross-examination, he agreed that it may well have been the case that at the time of a settlement by Redmond with CAB and the Revenue in early 2000, the apartment in question was owned by Redmond's wife.
He agreed that the settlement was in the region of £780,000 on foot of a potential tax liability. If any other asset came to light, CAB would be entitled to pursue Redmond for up to £2.5 million.
Recalled to the witness box, Redmond said his wife owned the apartment. The intention was that it would be sold. He had told his wife he was not guilty (at the criminal trial) and his wife had said she would pay the cost of the trial. The costs were paid out of the proceeds of the apartment.
In the application to adduce new evidence relating to the bank accounts of Mr Fassnidge at Bank of Ireland, Blanchardstown, Mr Grehan said Mr Fassnidge seemed to have had no recollection of a £10,000 payment until the fourth day of Redmond's trial.
In an affidavit, Ms Clare O'Callaghan, solicitor, for Redmond, said that in advance of the trial voluminous disclosure was made to the defence by the prosecution. It was made clear, due to lapse of time, that there were no bank records in existence in relation to Mr Fassnidge's bank accounts with Bank of Ireland, Blanchardstown, where he alleged he had procured the £10,000 before handing it to Redmond.
She said it was therefore not possible to show whether in fact Mr Fassnidge had withdrawn that sum from the bank in relation to the transaction. Redmond's side had understood that to be the position before the trial.
However, after conviction and sentence, she wrote to the DPP's office seeking documentation referred to by a bank manager in evidence and had received the bank records of Mr Fassnidge. From a perusal of those, it appeared they did not support Mr Fassnidge's allegation against Redmond.
Mr Grehan said bank records, for whatever reason, did not come into the hands of the Garda and therefore the prosecution was not able to proffer them to Mr Redmond's lawyers. He asked the Court of Criminal Appeal to receive the additional evidence of Mr Fassnidge's records.
Mr Patrick McCarthy, for the DPP, said there was before the trial court evidence of a sufficient nature to have allowed the accounts to be produced. The legal machinery for doing that existed but it appeared the defence, for their own reasons, decided not to pursue that evidence. They could have sought a discharge of the jury and sought a retrial.