Battery life seems to have been a big deal, huge improvements.

ShareThis

The Government sold its 30.4% stake in Greencore to investors for £70m. £100m was raised around the same time from a sale of the Government’s stake in Irish Life.

Greencore management had supported the idea of selling shares to US investors Arther Daniels Midland, but a decision was later taken by Ahern to sell the shares on the open market, and British and Irish institutions. It was said that Ahern could not convince his cabinet colleagues (the Labour ones) of the merits of the ADM investment.

The 25.4 million shares were placed on the stock market by Davy Stockbrokers.

But a couple of weeks later, it emerged that the Directors of Davy had themselves bought shares in Greencore to the tune of £19m. Four companies directly associated with Davy and four of its directors acquired 4.5m shares of Greencore at a cost of £12.4m. A further 2.5m shares worth £6.9m were held on their behalf by British investment firm SG Warburg.

Two million more shares were sold to an account in Bank of Ireland Private Bannking held by three Davy directors - Brian Davy, Kyran McLaughlin and Tony Garry. Another two million were sold to Gandon, a financial services firm in which Mr McLaughlin, Mr Davy and Mr David Shubotham have a combined 18% stake. Smaller amounts were sold to Corder investments a company owned by Mr McLaughlin and to a Davy pension fund.

Mc McLaughlin denied suggestions that the arrangement with Warburg constituted any sort of a share-support operation, or that Warburg had covertly warehoused the Greencore shares on behalf of Davy.

As a result of the scandal, the ISE suspended Greencore shares, which had been placed the previous Friday at 275p. Half of the 16 British instituional investors pulled out after the scandal. The ISE said the market was misled by the share sale announcements made by Greencore and the Department of Finance. Albert Reynolds even threatened that Davy would never again be involved in a Government share sale. The Davy Directors refused to resign as a result of the scandal.

See the Oireachtas debate.

Bank of Ireland (who owned Davy) later agreed to aquire 10m shares in of the Government’s stake, should the shares go unsold.

Earlier that year, in January 1993, a cheque for £5,000 from Davy Stockbrokers was lodged into the B/T account, sworn by four bank officials as standing for the “Bertie/Tim account”.

Did you know… bonus.

At the very same time as this scandal the Broadcasting Authority (Amendment) Bill was making its way through the Dail. The bill removed the advertising cap put on RTE by Minister Ray Burke in 1990.

It was later found that Burke had taken bribes to introduce that legislation.

ShareThis

ShareThis

ShareThis

Hilarious Izzard.

ShareThis

It’s actually rather well done.

ShareThis

ShareThis

Today, finally, we have the announcement that Taoiseach Bertie Ahern will resign on May 6. It is welcome news.

Mr Ahern spent much of his speech spelling out his contribution to Irish political life, and his service to the State. In the latter part he dealt with the allegations that have been his undoing. While I accept that Ahern made a contribution to the peace process, in no way does this mean that somehow he has a right to stay on in political office, nor does it excuse him from being accountable.

Cian rightly points out that it was not the media, bloggers, or even Facebook groups that led to the appalling vista of Ahern’s incredible tales and ultimate resignation. It was Ahern himself that got himself into this mess. And the only recourse, ultimately, was his resignation.

I have called for his resignation several times since his now infamous interview with Bryan Dobson in September 2006. In truth, we have spent nearly 20 months stewing over his changing stories, his incredible tales, and the sums of money involved in those tales kept growing.

As time went on it became clear that at the time he spoke to the nation on national television he had yet to tell the tribunal half of what we now know. Celia Larkin’s accounts only came to light in April 2007. Ahern changed his story in relation to the second digout during evidence in September 2007. The list goes on.

Increasingly, critics said the tribunal was no longer about the original allegation that Owen O’Callaghan gave cash to Ahern, that it had become some sort of vendetta. To some degree they are right on the former but wrong on the latter. Simply put, it was Ahern’s reaction to the tribunal’s inquiry that led directly to his resignation.

Indeed, if the Tribunal reported tomorrow and found that there were no corrupt payments it simply would not matter. Ahern’s changing positions on his own finances are what led to this result - as far as I can see he was caught up in a tangled web of his prevarications. It became less about the original allegation and more about what tribunal found - and Ahern’s response to those discoveries.

But I don’t see this as a victory for accountability. Ahern was dragged kicking and screaming to a resignation, when he really should have resigned a very long time ago. If, for example, PTSB had not found the documents that they did, Ahern would very likely still be clinging on to power, and brazening it for as long as possible - and to hell with standards or perceived standards in public life.

We have to ask ourselves what sort of society we want. One where the leader of our country spends an inordinate amount of time answering questions about vasts sums of money in his accounts, appoints friends to State jobs, takes cash from businessmen… and all the rest… or one where politicians do all of the above - but when found out resign immediately for the good of the country.

Ireland is a very long way from a democracy which is accountable to its people, and Ahern’s games around the tribunal have only served to bring the country into disrepute and to blacken the highest political office in the country.

Ahern, Taoiseach or not, has very serious matters to answer. Tribunal matters. Cash matters. Corruption matters. Criminal matters. How we deal with those matters, and how we punish wrongdoing in public office, will define our nation.

If we fall short in that regard, we all lose.

ShareThis

This is clearly nonsense. The media in fact did not go out of its way to criticise Ahern, all it did was seek answers about his tribunal evidence. And even after Carruth’s evidence broke two weeks ago, the media remained quiet for a very long time.

Ahern’s silence since Carruth’s evidence is perhaps a sign of how bad things are. We still await explanations of sterling lodgments, and indeed more lodgments. Questions remain over potential allegations of money laundering and the vast sums of money going through Ahern’s accouns and other accounts to which he is linked.

Ahern is not off the hook. I look forward to his next day in the tribunal.

ShareThis

If he puts a date on his departure within the next six months. Not good enough.

Upate: May 6, he’s a gonner. Saying that this had nothing to do with Grainne Carruth’s evidence is bullshit. He still has a lot of explaining to do. And I wait to hear where the sterling came from.

The Facebook group is delighted (which peaked at 2,634 members), an outpouring of wall posts.

From my own point of view, I have no sympathy whatever for Mr Ahern. For 20 months we have been dragged through this nonsense. If this country was truly functioning, he would have resigned a very long time ago indeed.

And it all was of his own making.

ShareThis

104
1 MR. GRAINNE CARRUTH, HAVING BEEN SWORN, WAS QUESTIONED BY
14:57:54
2 MR. O’NEILL AS FOLLOWS:
3
4 CHAIRMAN: Good afternoon, Ms. Carruth.
5
6 Q. 624 MR. O’NEILL: Ms. Carruth, I think you worked with Mr. Bertie Ahern from 1987
7 until 1999, is that correct?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. 625 And you have already given evidence before the Tribunal in relation to the
10 operations which were taking place in St. Lukes in Drumcondra which is where
14:58:15
11 you were based, is that correct?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. 626 Recently the Tribunal wrote to your solicitors on the 6th of March 2008, on the
14 subject matter which has been the subject of the examination of the last
15 witnesses who were heard today by the Tribunal. And I will read that letter,
14:58:35
16 it’s at page 27275 on screen, please.
17
18 “Dear Mr. Millar. The Tribunal has been informed by Mr. Bertie Ahern that
19 lodgements to his account and to the accounts of his daughters at Irish
20 Permanent Building Society, Lower Drumcondra Road in 1994, were processed at his request by Ms. Grainne Carruth.
22
23 The Tribunal has received information from Irish Life & Permanent plc the
24 successors to IPBS, that lodgements in their, documents in their possession
25 confirm that certain lodgements to these accounts were processed byMs. Carruth.
27
28 From the information provided to the Tribunal by Irish Life & Permanent plc, it
29 would appear that a number of the transactions conducted by Ms. Carruth may
30 have involved foreign exchange transactions conducted within the Drumcondra
1 branch of the IPBS, details of which are set out hereunder.
2
3 Irish pound lodgements of the 9th of March 1994.
4 1. A lodgement of 4,119.59 pounds was made to the account of Mr. Bertie Ahern.
5 The Tribunal awaits confirmation of the identity of the person who made this
6 lodgement.
7
8 2. A lodgement of 1,028.40 pounds was made to the account of Ms. Cecelia
9 Ahern, accompanied by a lodgement docket signed by Ms. Grainne Carruth.
10
11 3. A lodgement of 1,028.40 pounds to the account of Ms. Georgina Ahern was
12 made accompanied by a lodgement docket signed by Ms. Grainne Carruth.
13
14 Foreign exchange transactions of 9th of March 1994.
15
16 1. A purchase of 4,000 pounds Sterling by IPBS resulted in the seller
17 receiving 4,119.59 pounds. A sum of 4,119.59 pounds was lodged to the account
18 of Mr. Bertie Ahern on the 9th of March 1994. The computer record at IPBS
19 shows that the Sterling purchase transaction was the 12th transaction conducted
20 through teller machine No. 2 on that date and is recorded as having been
21 processed at 10:24.
22
23 The lodgement to the account of Mr. Ahern was the 13th transaction pro
24 processed through teller machine No. 2 and took place at 10:28. Please
25 ascertain from Ms. Carruth whether she is the person who processed the Sterling
26 transaction result in the 4,119.59 pounds being received for the 4,000 pounds
27 Sterling and if the lodgement of the 4,119.59 pounds represents the lodgement
28 to the account of Mr. Ahern of the proceeds of this FX transaction.
29
30 2. 1,000 pounds Sterling was purchased by IPBS for 1,028.40 pounds and the

1 transaction was processed through teller machine No. 2 as the 14th transaction
2 conducted on the machine that day. A lodgement of 1,028.40 pounds to the
3 account of Ms. Cecelia Ahern is recorded as the 15th transaction conducted on
4 teller machine No. 2 at 10:31 on the 9th of March 1994. Please ascertain from
5 Ms. Carruth whether the foreign exchange transaction involving the exchange of
6 1,000 pounds of Sterling for 1,028.40 pounds was conducted by Ms. Carruth and
7 whether the lodgement of 1,028.40 pounds represents the proceeds of this
8 foreign exchange transaction.
9
10 3. A further sum of 1,000 pounds Sterling was exchanged for 1,028.40 pounds as
11 the 16th transaction conducted through teller machine No. 2 on the 9th of March
12 1994 at 10:31. The lodgement of 1,028.40 pounds to the account of Ms. Georgina
13 Ahern was the 17th transaction conducted through teller machine No. 2 that day
14 at 10:33.
15
16 Please ascertain whether Ms. Carruth carried out the foreign exchange
17 transaction of 1,000 pounds Sterling for 1,028.40 pounds and whether the
18 lodgement of 1,028.40 pounds represents the proceeds of this FX transaction.
19
20 Irish pound lodgements of the 9th of May 1994.
21 1. A lodgement in the sum of 3,518.99 pounds was made to the account of
22 Mr. Bertie Ahern accompanied by a lodgement docket signed by Ms. Grainne
23 Carruth.
24
25 2. A lodgement in the sum of 1,000 pounds was made to the account of
26 Ms. Cecelia Ahern accompanied by a lodgement docket signed by Ms. Grainne
27 Carruth.
28
29 3. A lodgement of 1,000 pounds was made to the account Ms. Georgina Ahern,
30 accompanied by a lodgement docket signed by Ms. Grainne Carruth.

1 Foreign exchange transaction of the 9th of May 1994.
2 5,450 pounds Sterling was purchased for the sum of 5,518.99 pounds. Please
3 ascertain from Ms. Carruth whether she is the person who conducted the FX
4 transaction and whether the 5,518.99 pounds represents the 5,518.99 pounds
5 lodged by Ms. Carruth to the accounts of Mr. Ahern and Ms. Cecelia and
6 Ms. Georgina Ahern as 3,518.99, 1,000 pounds and 1,000 pounds.
7
8 Irish pound lodgement of the 28th of October 1994.
9 A lodgement in the sum of 3,970.19 pounds was made to the account of Mr. Bertie
10 Ahern accompanied by a lodgement docket signed by Ms. Grainne Carruth.
11
12 Foreign exchange transaction of the 28th of October 1994.
13 4,000 pounds Sterling was exchanged at the branch for the sum of 3,970.19
14 pounds on the 28th of October 1994. Please ascertain whether Ms. Carruth
15 conducted this transaction and whether the sum of 3,970.19 pounds lodged to the
16 account of Mr. Ahern by Ms. Carruth was funded from the 3,970.19 pounds
17 proceeds of the exchange of 4,000 pounds Sterling.
18
19 The Tribunal requests a narrative statement from Ms. Carruth in respect of
20 these transactions in which she should set out the circumstances in which these
21 monies came in to her possession, detailing any explanation given to her for
22 the fact that the monies furnished to her were furnish in the Sterling and
23 information she has in relation to the source of these monies. Ms. Carruth
24 should set out any other Sterling transactions with which she was involved on
25 behalf of Mr. Ahern and should detail the manner in which she has accounted for
26 all such transactions as were carried out by her on behalf of Mr. Ahern,
27 whether involving foreign currencies or otherwise and whether conducted at IPBS
28 Drumcondra or elsewhere.
29
30 I enclose for your attention the documentation provided to the Tribunal by
1 Irish Life & Permanent plc in relation to the above transactions. The Tribunal
2 would approach appreciation receiving your client’s earliest pons to the
3 matters raised here.”
4
5 Ms. Carruth, I take it that this letter was wrought brought to your attention
6 relatively after its receipt by your solicitor, Mr. Millar, is that correct?
7 A. I did see it, yes.
8 Q. 627 And is there anything in this document that is unclear to you as regards the
9 requests for information which were being made of you in this letter?
10 A. No.
11 Q. 628 No. You were subsequently invited to attend at interview and to provide a
12 narrative statement to the Tribunal in respect of the matters you have dealt
13 with herein. To date you have done neither, isn’t that so?
14 A. That’s correct.
15 Q. 629 So can we deal now perhaps in the most general way with the queries which you
16 are raised here. And can you tell me whether or not it is the case that on the
17 9th of March 1994, that you conducted three Sterling transactions at the Irish
18 Permanent Building Society in Drumcondra. The first of them involving the
19 exchange of 4,000 pounds Sterling so as to result in 4,119.59 pounds. Did you
20 conduct such a transaction?
21 A. I have no recollection of any foreign, on any dealings with Sterling
22 whatsoever.
23 Q. 630 Is that to be taken as a no, that you didn’t conduct a transaction or are you
24 saying that it may have happened but you simply can’t recollect it?
25 A. I have no recollections on any Sterling transactions whatsoever.
26 Q. 631 Yes. I have already heard that response, Ms. Carruth. I am asking you whether
27 or not the Tribunal is to accept from that response which you have given twice
28 that it may be that such a transaction took place and you simply cannot
29 recollect it or is it the case that no such transaction took place?
30 A. The transaction took place but I had no dealings with Sterling. I have no
1 recollections of dealings with Sterling.
2
3 CHAIRMAN: Sorry. Ms. Carruth, there is an important difference between
4 saying I definitely had no dealings with Sterling involving Mr. Ahern and on
5 the one hand and on the other hand, saying I have no recollection. Because
6 that’s — that can be taken as meaning that you may have had but you now can’t
7 remember. Because you told us before —
8 A. You are asking. Sorry, Judge Mahon, you are asking me yes or no did I deal
9 with sterling.
10
11 CHAIRMAN: Yes.
12 A. No.
13
14 CHAIRMAN: No you didn’t deal with Sterling.
15 A. No.
16
17 CHAIRMAN: So it’s not a matter that you have forgotten?
18 A. Well I …
19
20 CHAIRMAN: Because you told us before that you had had no dealings with
21 Sterling.
22 A. Judge Keys asked me the last time I was here did I deal with foreign money
23 currencies. And I said no. I stand by that from December and I stand by that
24 today.
25
26 CHAIRMAN: All right.
27
28 Q. 632 MR. O’NEILL: So the answer then to the first question that you were asked in
29 correspondence is that you did not involve yourself in a sale of 4,000 pounds
30 Sterling to the Irish Permanent Building Society on the 9th of March 1994, is
that right?

2 A. Yes.
3 Q. 633 Did you have any involvement in the sale of 1,000 pounds Sterling to IPBS on
4 the 9th of March 1994, which resulted in the sum of 1,028.40 pounds being given
5 to the seller?
6 A. No.
7 Q. 634 No. Does the same apply then to the second foreign, third foreign exchange
8 transaction that day involving the sale of 1,000 pounds Sterling for 1,028.40
9 pounds?
10 A. No.
11 Q. 635 You weren’t involved in that either?
12 A. No.
13 Q. 636 Were you in the branch of the Irish Permanent Building Society on the 9th of
14 March 1994?
15 A. I don’t know, that’s 14 years ago.
16 Q. 637 I see. You have looked at the documentation which was sent to you,
17 Ms. Carruth, which bears your name on it and gives the details of the
18 transactions. Do you have to rely on recollection of what happened 14 years
19 ago in order to answer that question?
20 A. I have looked at the documentation.
21 Q. 638 Yes.
22 A. And my name is on the documentation.
23 Q. 639 I see. But does that carry with it any implication for you if your name is on
24 the documentation?
25 A. No, I don’t think so.
26
27 CHAIRMAN: Could we see that documentation?
28
29 MR. O’NEILL: If we look at page 27289. If we enlarge that and turn it.
30
1 CHAIRMAN: Do we have one without the address on it.
2
3 MR. O’NEILL: Yes, the documents we used this morning.
4
5 CHAIRMAN: Is there an address on them?
6
7 Q. 640 MR. O’NEILL: You see that document on screen there, Ms. Carruth?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. 641 You were sent a copy of this document albeit with the complete address on it
10 which has been deleted for privacy reasons this morning. You are Grainne
11 Carruth, isn’t that so?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. 642 The address which is beneath that you know to be the address that you were
14 living in, in 1994, isn’t that so?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. 643 Right. Did you write Grainne Carruth and put this address here?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. 644 You did. Does it follow then that you made the lodgement of 1,028.40 pounds to
19 the account of Ms. Celia Larkin (sic)?
20 A. Cecelia Ahern.
21 Q. 645 Ms. Cecelia Ahern on the 9th of March 1994. Sorry I beg your pardon.
22 A. No.
23 Q. 646 It doesn’t?
24 A. No.
25 Q. 647 Well will you explain that, please?
26 A. The date is not mine.
27 Q. 648 Yes.
28 A. The account number is not my handwriting and the total is not my handwriting.
29 Q. 649 What do you mean by the total, the 1,028.40?
30 A. Yes.
1 Q. 650 I see. But it is your writing on the lodgement docket?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. 651 And that lodgement docket resulted in this amount of money being lodged to the
4 account of Ms. Cecelia Ahern.
5
6 CHAIRMAN: On that date.
7
8 Q. 652 MR. O’NEILL: On that date.
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. 653 What role did you have in this, Ms. Carruth?
11 A. On this particular lodgement?
12 Q. 654 Uh-huh.
13 A. I filled out the lodgement slip. I filled out Grainne Carruth and Cecelia
14 Ahern.
15 Q. 655 Did you have 1,028.40 pounds in your hand at the time?
15:14:07
16 A. No.
17 Q. 656 Sorry? No?
18 A. No.
19 Q. 657 Well what were you doing then signing a lodgement docket if you weren’t going
20 to lodge this money to it?
15:14:18
21 A. I could have signed it with the belief of going over there or maybe go at some
22 stage but I did not lodge 1,228.40.
23
24 CHAIRMAN: Ms. Carruth, you have told us before that you did make lodgements
25 to the girls accounts.
15:14:38
26 A. Judge Mahon, I made lodgements to the girls accounts, yes. I did that.
27
28 CHAIRMAN: So this is, I’m just wondering how you can so certain that this
29 wasn’t one of them. What makes you think from the information there that this
30 wasn’t one of the ones that you lodged to the girls’ accounts
15:14:53
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
113
1 A. Because I have no recollection. I have no belief that I ever saw or handled or
15:14:57
2 dealt in Sterling.
3
4 CHAIRMAN: No but this is.
5 A. That’s a Sterling transaction I assume.
15:15:18
6
7 CHAIRMAN: No. This is —
8 A. Irish.
9
10 CHAIRMAN: This is the Irish equivalent of the Sterling.
15:15:18
11 A. Yes.
12
13 CHAIRMAN: So this is the actual lodgement to the account.
14 A. Yes.
15
15:15:21
16 CHAIRMAN: The Sterling, the Sterling transaction took place within a very
17 short period of time of this.
18 A. Right, yes.
19
20 CHAIRMAN: The bank believe that they are connected.
15:15:32
21 A. Yes.
22
23 CHAIRMAN: But well can you Explain circumstances which might occur where you
24 would fill out the docket that somebody else would have …
25 A. That is possible. I could have filled out the lodgements slip. It could have
15:15:48
26 been in the office but nothing else relates to my handwriting on that only my
27 signature and Cecelia E Ahern.
28 Q. 658 MR. O’NEILL: You have already, I think given evidence to the Tribunal, Ms.
29 Carruth, you were the only person who made the lodgements to the girls account,
30 isn’t that your evidence?
15:16:15
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
114
1 A. Yes.
15:16:16
2 Q. 659 If that is true, then this lodgement to the girls account is a lodgement made
3 by you, isn’t that so?
4 A. No, I don’t believe that.
5 Q. 660 Well then it would mean that somebody else other than you made lodgements to
15:16:27
6 the girls accounts, whereas it was your evidence that you were the only person
7 who made the lodgements to the girls accounts?
8 A. I made lodgements to the girls accounts from his salary cheques.
9 Q. 661 You were the only one who did so?
10 A. That was my belief, yes.
15:16:47
11 Q. 662 Have you changed your belief now because you see this document and you are
12 disclaiming this document as being a document which resulted in you making a
13 lodgement?
14 A. I don’t know and I don’t remember doing any of this.
15 Q. 663 Is the reason that you are disclaiming this document because you know it to be
15:17:09
16 a lodgement of an amount which was generated from an exchange of 1,000 pounds
17 Sterling?
18 A. I never dealt in Sterling.
19 Q. 664 Yes. Why do you say that you didn’t make this lodgement, Ms. Carruth?
20 A. Because it equates from Sterling and I have no knowledge of Sterling.
15:17:32
21 Q. 665 But there’s nothing on the face of this to suggest to you that it is in fact
22 Sterling?
23 A. But you are saying earlier that it came from a process which was —
24 Q. 666 That is the belief from?
25 A. — sterling.
15:17:50
26 Q. 667 That is the belief of the bank from the series of events that have been
27 examined in detail over the course of the morning and the records of the bank
28 which would show that this particular transaction No. 15 in series was preceded
29 by transaction No. 14 which we’ll see at page 27288 was the exchange. 27288,
30 the exchange of 1,000 pounds Sterling for the sum of 1,028.40 pounds. You see
15:18:16
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
115
1 that that is transaction No. 14 on that day?
15:18:28
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. 668 Indicating on its face indicating on its face that this is part of a series of
4 transactions. So whilst it is evident that it is a transaction which took
5 place in the branch on the same day and in an amount which is exactly the same
15:18:48
6 as regards the six digits that you see representing the amount as the six
7 digits which were lodged to Ms. Cecelia Ahern’s account. There is nothing in
8 fact on the face of the document 27289 which says that it’s Sterling, isn’t
9 that so?
10 A. Yes.
15:19:15
11 Q. 669 So if you can’t remember the transaction, what particular reason prompts you to
12 disclaim having an involvement in it, if you can’t remember it and if appears
13 to have your name and address on the face of it?
14 A. I don’t know, my name and my address is on it, that’s all I can account for.
15 Q. 670 So your name and address on a lodgement slip of this amount to this account
15:19:40
16 would in all probability mean that you are the person making the lodgement,
17 isn’t that so?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. 671 Yes. Yet you are saying that you did not make this lodgement?
20 A. Yes.
15:20:00
21 Q. 672 And is the only reason you are saying that because you believe that this sum is
22 connected with the exchange of 1,000 pounds Sterling and you are already on
23 record as denying having involvement with Sterling?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. 673 Is that why you are denying this particular transaction as being your own?
15:20:15
26 A. Yes.
27
28 CHAIRMAN: Well, Ms. Carruth, that could place you in a somewhat serious
29 position because in effect if your answer is taken in its ordinary meaning it
30 would suggest that the only reason you are now denying any knowledge of these,
15:20:41
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
116
1 of this particular lodgement, is because you don’t want to be seen to be taking
15:20:46
2 a different stance than you took on a previous occasion, do you understand?
3 Which isn’t a very good reason for taking that position. And it could, and it
4 has very serious consequences for you, given that you are giving evidence under
5 oath. Do you understand?
15:21:11
6
7 What you have effectively said in reply to Mr. O’Neill a few moments ago was,
8 or is, that because you took a particular stance on the last occasion, maybe
9 genuinely so, I mean, I’m not suggesting that it automatically follows that you
10 were lying on a previous occasion. But because you took a position the last
15:21:38
11 time, that you are now — that you are going to stand over that position even
12 given the evidence that we see.
13 A. The evidence that I see, Judge Mahon, remains on it.
14
15 CHAIRMAN: Well your name, your address.
15:21:49
16 A. Yes.
17
18 CHAIRMAN: The name of the account holder.
19 A. Yes.
20
15:21:54
21 CHAIRMAN: Yes.
22 A. I have no recollections of Sterling.
23
24 JUDGE FAHERTY: And coupled, just to add to the Chairman, with your previous
25 testimony that you were the only person who made lodgements to the accounts of
15:22:02
26 Cecelia and Georgina Ahern?
27 A. Yes.
28
29 JUDGE FAHERTY: Isn’t that correct?
30 A. Yes.
15:22:09
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
117
1 JUDGE FAHERTY: Fine.
15:22:12
2
3 MR. MILLAR: Mr. Chairman, sorry to interrupt Mr. O’Neill he was just about to
4 start there.
5
15:22:20
6 To be fair to the witness, I think what’s happened here is that working on the
7 assumption that the 1,028.40 was the proceeds of 1,000 Sterling. By
8 implication it’s linking my client into a Sterling transaction. And I think
9 that’s what’s causing the confusion here.
10
15:22:33
11 I think if it was simply that this had no relationship to a Sterling
12 transaction I think that would be a different issue. But my client has no
13 recollection and has said that she did not deal with Sterling at all. So it is
14 the fact that these two are linked in the eyes of the Tribunal this morning
15 that’s what’s giving rise to the problem.
15:22:49
16
17 CHAIRMAN: Well let her answer properly would be, I assume it is a lodgement
18 that I was involved with but I have no recollection or I don’t believe that I
19 had any involvement with a linked or a possibly linked Sterling transaction.
20 But it’s important that Ms. Carruth would, would tell the Tribunal what her
15:23:04
21 honest belief and recollection is.
22
23 MR. MILLAR: Well I think she is giving you that, Chairman. I think the
24 situation is the linking of two transactions is what is causing the issue here.
25 Ms. Carruth obviously feels if she says that she made this lodgement, she is
15:23:24
26 saying that she made a sterling transaction, which she says never did. And
27 that’s giving rise to the problem.
28
29 JUDGE FAHERTY: Mr. Millar.
30
15:23:34
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
118
1 JUDGE KEYS: There is four minutes between the timing on the documentation
15:23:34
2 between the Sterling transaction and then the further lodgement to the, to both
3 children’s accounts. So they happened within minutes of each other.
4
5 JUDGE FAHERTY: Ms. Carruth, if I could put it this way. And if you look at
15:23:52
6 the sequence of events that would appear from the documentation we have. That
7 occurred on the 9th of March. And this might assist your recollection.
8 Perhaps it won’t but I put it forward.
9
10 As we understand it, somebody presented to the Irish Permanent on the 9th of
15:24:06
11 March at 10:24 with Sterling of 4,000 and a transaction was conducted where a
12 sum of 4,119.59 was received.
13 A. Yes.
14
15 JUDGE FAHERTY: At 10:28 somebody, obviously be it yourself or somebody else,
15:24:27
16 stepped in at that juncture to teller No. 2 and lodged, I am not saying it was
17 you, because I don’t know whether it was, perhaps you will tell us, 4,119.59 to
18 the account of Mr. Ahern. Are you with me so far?
19 A. Yes.
20
15:24:46
21 JUDGE FAHERTY: You then appear, if you don’t, if you weren’t involved as you
22 say in Sterling from the documentation you would appear at that juncture then
23 to have stepped out from teller No. 2 and allowed some other at 10:28 to
24 present himself or herself with 1,000 Sterling for conversion. They then step
25 out, it would appear from the documentation, and you step in again with one
15:25:12
26 whatever, 1,028.40 to lodge to Cecelia Ahern and ditto with Georgina Ahern.
27 That is the sequence of events of the documents that we see, and I am only
28 going on the documents, Ms. Carruth, you understand?
29 A. Yes.
30
15:25:36
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
119
1 JUDGE FAHERTY: So if you weren’t involved in Sterling transactions it would
15:25:36
2 appear that physically on the day on the 9th of March, somebody, in respect of
3 the two 1,000s. You were there at the teller lodging money, if you say you
4 were, if it’s accepted that you lodged the money to Cecelia Ahern’s account and
5 you would step out again and allow somebody else to conduct a transaction and
15:25:53
6 you go back again. Do you see what I’m saying?
7 A. Yes, Judge.
8
9 JUDGE FAHERTY: It seems completely illogical that that sequence of events
10 would have happened on that day, Ms. Carruth.
15:26:06
11 A. I accept that, thank you, Judge.
12 Q. 674 MR. O’NEILL: Having accepted it, Ms. Carruth, do you have any explanation that
13 you can offer to the Tribunal as to why it is that there are this sequence of
14 documents proceeding with item transaction No. 12, the exchange of 4,000 pounds
15 Sterling for 4,119.59 pounds a unique series of figures? That the very next
15:26:30
16 transaction No. 13 that goes through the system, has exactly the same sequence
17 of numbers 4,119.59. I suggest to you that it is absolutely proof positive
18 that those two transactions are interlinked because they have exactly the same
19 six digits in the same sequence as each other, isn’t that right?
20 A. Yes.
15:27:03
21 Q. 675 Yes. Did you ever lodge money to Mr. Ahern’s account and in particular did you
22 lodge this 4,119.59 pounds to his account?
23 A. It was only brought to my attention last week that Mr. Ahern even had an
24 account over there.
25 Q. 676 Well that is hardly an answer to the question I am asking you. Did you ever
15:27:29
26 lodge cash to Mr. Ahern’s accounts and in particular did you lodge this
27 4,119.59 pounds to his accounts?
28 A. I have no memory of that.
29 Q. 677 Well why have you no memory of the fact that you may have lodged cash to
30 Mr. Ahern’s accounts?
15:27:54
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
120
1 A. I have no memory of Bertie having an account over there.
15:27:57
2
3 CHAIRMAN: Ms. Carruth, were you ever in this bank?
4 A. Yes.
5
15:28:05
6 CHAIRMAN: During your time with Mr. Ahern?
7 A. Yes.
8
9 CHAIRMAN: For what purpose?
10 A. To lodge to his daughter’s accounts.
15:28:09
11
12 CHAIRMAN: Okay. So you are saying that while you lodged to their accounts
13 you never lodged to Mr. Ahern’s accounts?
14 A. No, I am saying that I have no memory of him. I have no recollection of him
15 having an account there at that time.
15:28:27
16
17 CHAIRMAN: And is it likely that you would have lodged 1,028.40 pounds?
18 A. It seems a strange amount, Judge.
19
20 CHAIRMAN: Yes, in cash?
15:28:37
21 A. Yes.
22
23 CHAIRMAN: Unless it was a cheque, which it wasn’t?
24 A. Yes.
25
15:28:44
26 CHAIRMAN: Or unless it was, it had been exchanged for Sterling or whatever?
27 A. Yes.
28
29 CHAIRMAN: You would agree with that?
30 A. Yes.
15:28:53
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
121
1 CHAIRMAN: It’s not a sum — you are unlikely to go over with 1,028.40 pounds?
15:28:53
2 A. That doesn’t make sense.
3
4 CHAIRMAN: Twice.
5 A. Yes.
15:29:03
6
7 CHAIRMAN: In effect twice.
8 A. Yes. You would, to me I would wound it up to 1,000 pounds or that.
9
10 CHAIRMAN: So given that we see your name here?
15:29:13
11 A. Yes.
12
13 CHAIRMAN: Is it still your position that you don’t believe you were involved
14 with this particular transaction or is it the case that you accept that you
15 probably were but you have no recollection of it?
15:29:27
16 A. I accept, Judge, I probably was but I have no recollection of it.
17
18 CHAIRMAN: All right.
19
20 Q. 678 MR. O’NEILL: So if you probably were involved in such a transaction or series
15:29:37
21 of transactions on this one day, Ms. Carruth, it would follow that somebody had
22 given you 6,000 pounds in Sterling with an instruction that you would lodge
23 4,000 of it to Mr. Ahern’s account when translated into Irish money. That you
24 would lodge 1,000 of it when translated into Irish money to the account of each
25 of his daughters, isn’t that the so? That’s the only logical sequence that can
15:30:05
26 happen, isn’t that right?
27 A. I have no recollection of Sterling ever being in my hands.
28
29 MR. MILLAR: Sorry, Mr. Chairman, sorry to interrupt. I think my client was
30 agreeing with the Chairman’s assertion there that she was involved in the
15:30:25
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
122
1 lodgement to the girls accounts. Maybe that’s what she meant I think.
15:30:29
2
3 MR. O’NEILL: Well —
4
5 CHAIRMAN: I want to be quite clear about this. Ms. Carruth also accepts that
15:30:37
6 it was unlikely that she’d have gone over with 1,028.40 pounds into the bank,
7 that odd sum and lodged unless it was either a cheque, which we know it wasn’t,
8 or linked to a Sterling amount. Because if would, clearly and she accepts
9 this, it wouldn’t have been logical for somebody to use pence in those
10 circumstances on an odd figure when lodging to two separate accounts. That’s
15:31:12
11 her position, as I understand it.
12
13 Q. 679 MR. O’NEILL: You see, you were asked, Ms. Carruth, in the course of an
14 interview back in July of 2006, which followed upon Mr. Ahern having informed
15 the Tribunal that lodgements were made by you and by Ms. Sandra Cullagh to —
15:31:33
16 Sorry, not lodgements but cheques of his were exchanged in financial
17 institutions for cash by you and by Ms. Cullagh. And this was during a period
18 when he did not operate any bank accounts, isn’t that so?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. 680 You are aware of that? He indicated to the Tribunal that he would give his pay
15:31:59
21 cheque to you or to Ms. Cullagh and that it would be cashed and the cash would
22 be brought back to him in his office?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. 681 Isn’t that so? And you were asked at interview what your role was in his
25 banking affairs and you gave evidence or you gave an answer to questions put to
15:32:19
26 you in relation to it, isn’t that so?
27 A. Yes.
28 Q. 682 Now, I will just recap on that if we may by looking at page 17932, a series of
29 questions and answers starting at question six. That’s page 17932. Question
30 six, please.
15:32:51
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
123
1 “Q: And in relation to Mr. Ahern’s affairs in, addition to dealing with his
15:32:52
2 political affairs, would you have had any dealings with his personal affairs?
3 A: No, only in dealing with doing the lodgements of his pay cheques.
4 Q: In that context, can you tell us what your best recollection when was that
5 first request to conduct any banking transactions?
15:33:13
6 A: Probably from the start. He would have just asked me to go over to the
7 bank”.
8 The start there, Ms. Carruth, is 1987, isn’t that correct?
9 A. Yes.
10 “Q: What was the nature of the transaction?
15:33:27
11 A: It would have been to cash his minister’s cheque or TD’s cheque and bring
12 it back to him in the office. I would have cashed the cheque in Drumcondra.
13 Q: And was it always in Drumcondra?
14 A: Yes. I always went to AIB in Drumcondra and then I would come back to him
15 in the office and give him the cash back or leave the money for him in his
15:33:46
16 room”.
17
18 That was your first response to what your banking transactions were for
19 Mr. Ahern, isn’t that right?
20 A. Yes.
15:33:58
21 Q. 683 And I think that when it came to giving the detail of that on day 802 at page
22 163 you were asked about the cheques that you would cash for Mr. Ahern. At
23 question 102. That’s day 802 page 163; question 102 .
24
25 “Q: And was it the case that Mr. Ahern would, it was always just one cheque or
15:34:38
26 would you be given, could it be the case that on occasion he would have
27 assembled a number of cheques?
28 A: No, I was given the cheques each month.
29 Q. Every month?
30 A: Yeah. Every month. He would have been paid on a monthly basis, he would
15:34:52
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
124
1 have given them to me then.
15:34:57
2 Q: I think he was actually paid every two weeks but I’m subject to correction
3 on that, but your recollection is that it was a monthly payment?
4 A: Monthly.
5 Q: Okay. But if it was every two weeks what you are clear about is that you
15:35:06
6 only did it once a month so he may well have cheque given you two cheques once
7 a month?
8 A: I don’t recall. I just remember it being every month.”
9
10 Judge Keys asked you on the same day at page 169, 802 “Just one question. Do I
15:35:23
11 take it from your evidence that the only banking input you had with Mr. Ahern
12 was related purely to his cheques arising from his salary, is that correct?
13 A: Yes, Judge.
14 Q: Nothing else?
15 A: Nothing else, Judge”.
15:35:46
16
17 Do we take it from that, Ms. Carruth, that until that point, day 802, you were
18 making no reference to the fact that you were in fact making lodgements to
19 Mr. Ahern’s own accounts, isn’t that so?
20 A. Yes.
15:36:03
21 Q. 684 And why is it that you did not indicate to the Tribunal at that time that not
22 only were you engaged in cashing his cheques and bringing the money back to
23 him, you were also engaged in making lodgements to his bank account?
24 A. I don’t remember. I didn’t remember at the time that he had a bank account —
25 an Irish Permanent account.
15:36:28
26 Q. 685 Well had you not discuss this had with Mr. Ahern before the responses were
27 given by him to the Tribunal as to what accounts he had and what lodgements
28 were made to them, did he not discuss that with you?
29 A. No.
30 Q. 686 We’ll see from page 27293, the next lodgement in sequence to the IPBS account
15:36:46
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
125
1 of Mr. Ahern’s was the sum of 3,518.99 pounds. You see that? It will come on
15:36:54
2 screen now in a moment; 27292, please. That’s an incorrect page reference
3 number. 27293, please.
4
5 I think this stems from the addresses may have been blanked but — is that it
15:37:26
6 there? Yes. That document 9th of May 1994, Ms. Carruth, you see that?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. 687 It’s a lodgement to Mr. Ahern’s account?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. 688 It’s sign the Grainne Carruth?
15:37:42
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. 689 Does it follow that you were in the bank on this day, the 9th of May 1994, and
13 that you made a lodgement of 3,018.99 pounds to Mr. Ahern’s account? Sorry.
14 3,518.99 pounds.
15 A. Yes.
15:38:03
16 Q. 690 You did?
17 A. I — when I look at this, it’s my date, that’s how I date stuff.
18 Q. 691 Yes.
19 A. So I possibly, yes, could have done this.
20 Q. 692 And you will see that that is a cash lodgement.
15:38:30
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. 693 What can you tell the Tribunal about making cash lodgements on behalf of
23 Mr. Ahern? You have so far indicated that until now you did not tell the
24 Tribunal that you made any lodgements to Mr. Ahern’s account. Are you is a now
25 saying that you made cash lodgements to his account?
15:38:43
26 A. I have no memory, well, it’s just being put in front of me that obviously
27 Bertie did have an account there. But I don’t have a memory of his account
28 being there.
29 Q. 694 Can I suggest to you that it hasn’t just been put in front of you, Ms. Carruth.
30 You’ve had this documentation for over two weeks now. You’ve been asked to
15:39:06
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
126
1 deliberate on it and to come in to give evidence in relation to your evidence
15:39:11
2 on this particular transaction?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. 695 You have had a whole series. In fact, you’ve had every document that was
5 considered this morning in evidence before you. And there are obvious
15:39:23
6 conclusions which anybody could draw from the sequencing of the transactions
7 and from your signature to various documents, isn’t that right?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. 696 Is it going to be the case that your response to every question on detail is
10 that you cannot recollect and you cannot remember?
15:39:44
11 A. I can’t remember, sorry. It’s 14 years ago. I can’t remember back that long.
12
13 JUDGE FAHERTY: Mrs. Carruth, on a previous occasion you had recollection of
14 bringing cash back to Mr. Ahern.
15 A. Yes.
15:40:03
16
17 JUDGE FAHERTY: And leaving it either in a drawer on or handing it to him on
18 occasions in respect of you cashing his cheques, isn’t that correct and you had
19 memory of that?
20 A. Yes.
15:40:13
21
22 JUDGE FAHERTY: And really what Mr. O’Neill is asking you. Is how is it that
23 you don’t have recollection or memory of doing the opposite, going with cash at
24 the behest of Mr. Ahern and lodging it?
25 A. My memory at that time was just dealing on his cheque and then going to Irish
15:40:27
26 Permanent.
27 Q. 697 MR. O’NEILL: You were asked in the course of interview with the Tribunal in
28 June of 2006, I beg your pardon. 6th of July 2006 at page 17935, question 33.
29
30 “In relation to other transactions were you ever requested by Mr. Ahern to
15:41:03
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
127
1 lodge cash to any account from the safe?
15:41:07
2 A: No.” Do you accept now that that is incorrect?
3 A. Yes.
4 Q. 698 In giving your evidence on day 802, Ms. Carruth, at page 169 you were
5 questioned by Judge Keys about the extent of your banking transactions for
15:41:48
6 Mr. Ahern as follows.
7
8 “I take it then from your evidence that the only banking input with Mr. Ahern
9 was related purely to his cheques arising from his salary, is that correct?
10 A: Yes, Judge.
15:42:09
11 Q: Nothing else?
12 A: Nothing else, Judge.
13 Q: Never asked to lodge monies, change currency or anything like that?
14 A: No. ”
15
15:42:20
16 That is now untrue, isn’t that right, Ms. Carruth?
17 A. It appears that way.
18 Q. 699 Well what’s the explanation for that, Ms. Carruth? Is it the case that until
19 such time as uncontrovertible evidence is laid before you, that you are
20 prepared to deny that you were involved in the matter. And when the evidence
15:42:50
21 is put before you, your response is to indicate that you simply cannot
22 recollect.
23
24 MR. MILLAR: Sorry, Mr. Chairman, I object to the manner in which way that
25 question was posed. I mean the witness has said that it was 14 years ago and
15:43:03
26 she does not recollect this at all.
27
28 MR. O’NEILL: I would like to continue my examination without interruption.
29
30 CHAIRMAN: Perfectly — Ms. Carruth has had this information now for a couple
15:43:12
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
128
1 of weeks. And I presume if it’s her position now, as it appears to be, that
15:43:18
2 information previously given to the Tribunal under oath was incorrect, that
3 that should have been corrected before now.
4
5 MR. MILLAR: Well I think with respect, she has offered an explanation for
15:43:35
6 that. She did not recollect this at all. It has been put to her that she did
7 recollect and this is as an implication of the Tribunal’s questions, she did
8 recollect it but she is only admitting it now. That is not what she said.
9
10 CHAIRMAN: Ms. Carruth accepts now that these transactions were conducted by
15:43:49
11 her.
12
13 MR. MILLAR: Yeah on the face of documentation that’s been put in front of
14 her, yes.
15
15:43:58
16 CHAIRMAN: Well it’s been put in front of her over the last week or two weeks.
17
18 MR. MILLAR: Oh, absolutely. But it wasn’t put in front of her when she was
19 here in December when the questions were posed by Judge Keys.
20
15:44:09
21 CHAIRMAN: I’m just saying the position. If these helped her recollect or
22 accept that the position is different to that already given, I am just
23 suggesting to you that the appropriate thing to have done was to have
24 corrected, to have sought to correct the record in the last week or two weeks.
25
15:44:31
26 MR. MILLAR: Well, Mr. Chairman, I have been in communication with the
27 Tribunal about this. We were asked to attend a meeting at less than 12 hours
28 notice when I wasn’t at work. When the Tribunal were advised that I wasn’t
29 there at all. We were then asked. That was on a Friday. We were then asked
30 to attend at 12 o’clock on Monday. I didn’t see the letter until Monday. So
15:44:44
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
129
1 we were given no opportunity.
15:44:49
2 CHAIRMAN: But you were also invited to make a, to submit a narrative
3 statement which could have been done.
4
5 MR. MILLAR: I have addressed that with the Tribunal’s solicitors. That I
15:44:58
6 didn’t have an opportunity to do that.
7
8 CHAIRMAN: All right.
9
10 MR. MILLAR: So I think it’s unfair to categorise it in that way that
15:45:03
11 Ms. Carruth refused or didn’t bother. That is not the case.
12
13 JUDGE KEYS: Can you recollect what you said in your letter to the Tribunal.
14
15 MR. MILLAR: Do you recollect?
15:45:15
16
17 MR. MILLAR: Absolutely I do, yes.
18
19 JUDGE KEYS: Standing by the answers which you gave to my questions.
20
15:45:23
21 MR. MILLAR: Yes.
22
23 JUDGE KEYS: She already having all of the documentation which has been put
24 before her now.
25
15:45:28
26 MR. MILLAR: I absolutely recollect it. The reality of the situation is after
27 14 years —
28
29 JUDGE KEYS: What’s unfair it about it?
30
15:45:37
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
130
1 MR. MILLAR: What’s unfair about it, Judge, is that categorising it in such a
15:45:37
2 way that this witness is simply saying now that she recollects issue but that
3 she is only being put to the pin of her collar to do so and that she was
4 conceding the truth. That’s what is unfair about it.
5
15:45:46
6 JUDGE KEYS: Why do you have to be put to the pin of your collar before you
7 concede anything?
8
9 MR. MILLAR: But that,s exactly the point, Judge Keys. You are making the
10 point that I am complaining about.
15:45:53
11
12 JUDGE KEYS: All I can say is that when she got the documentation. All your
13 client had to do was to look at the documentation. She could have made a
14 greater effort to try and recollect what exactly went on in this period of time
15 and in light of what she said now, could have gone to you and said listen, I
15:46:06
16 think I’m wrong in the manner in which I answered the questions raised by me.
17 And I have written in in advance and said in a normal narrative statement or at
18 least put the Tribunal on notice that your client is not standing by exactly
19 her answers which she has given to so far to the Tribunal.
20
15:46:31
21 MR. MILLAR: Judge, these issues came up for the first occasion. The last of
22 this documentation arrived in my office last Friday. We have dealt with this
23 matter expeditiously. And I object to the implied criticism that Ms. Carruth
24 should have come running in here two weeks ago saying I got it wrong. We are
25 here within a very short period of time of getting this documentation at all.
15:46:49
26
27 JUDGE KEYS: All we want is the truth. That’s what we’re looking for.
28
29 MR. MILLAR: I object to the implication that my client is not telling the
30 truth or has not told the truth.
15:46:59
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
131
1
15:47:02
2 CHAIRMAN: Okay.
3
4 Q. 700 MR. O’NEILL: I repeat the question to you, Ms. Carruth. And it’s this. Is it
5 the case that until such time as you are, have evidence produced to you which
15:47:07
6 uncontrovertibly establishes that you were involved in these transactions, that
7 you would not disclose them and once that evidence is available to you, that
8 your response is that you simply do not recollect?
9 A. I am trying to be good help and assistance to this Tribunal.
10 Q. 701 Okay. If that is so, Ms. Carruth, I think you accept that on the 9th of March
15:47:40
11 of 1994, you are involved in these three transactions involving Mr. Ahern and
12 his two daughters and lodgements to their accounts, isn’t that so?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. 702 The sum total of those lodgements is 6,176.39 pounds in cash. How could you
15 forget involving yourself in such a transaction?
15:48:09
16 A. I have no recollection of dealing in large amounts of money.
17 Q. 703 But you accept that you did. If you are the person involved in these
18 transactions you had in your hand during the course of that day 6,176.39 pounds
19 which is the exact equivalent of 6,000 pounds Sterling. I am suggesting to
20 you, you couldn’t forget that.
15:48:42
21 A. I have no recollection of that. I have no recollection of dealing in large
22 amounts of monies.
23 Q. 704 The very next transaction we see then on page 27293. Is the lodgement of
24 3,518.99 pounds to the account of Mr. Ahern on the 9th of May. Again, I’m
25 afraid it’s one of these ones with the obliterated address, which causes us
15:49:17
26 some delay here. You will see that that is also a cash lodgement, Ms. Carruth?
27 A. Yes.
28 Q. 705 And in the sequence of those lodgements the next is that of 1,000 pounds to
29 Ms. Cecelia Ahern’s account which is at page 27295. Sorry — 27295.
30
15:50:01
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
132
1 MR. MILLAR: Chairman, that’s the document with the address on it, please.
15:50:02
2 MR. O’NEILL: Right. I think we have it there now, Ms. Carruth. It’s 1,000
3 pounds to the account of Cecelia Ahern.
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. 706 Cash. It’s the next transaction in sequence. It’s No. 20 and No. 21 will be
15:50:26
6 the lodgement to Georgina’s account which is No. 19 in the same amount. Now,
7 those three amounts total 5,018.99 pounds when you add the three together,
8 isn’t that right?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. 707 Yes. And that as we know is the same sum as the product of the exchange of 5,
15:50:53
11 450 pounds Sterling on the same day through the same branch with the same
12 teller at page 27292. Would you accept the evidence of Mr. Hughes that his
13 belief was given this series of events, this sequence of documents that is
14 before you, his belief was that this exchange of 5,450 pounds Sterling produced
15 the 5,518.99 pounds which is represented in the next three lodgements, would
15:51:50
16 you accept that as being probable if not certain?
17 A. I would accept it.
18 Q. 708 You would accept it. And you accept that in each one of the three lodgement
19 dockets, you are the person who signed the lodgement docket, isn’t that so?
20 A. Yes.
15:52:12
21 Q. 709 So you would accept that you longed 5,518.99 pounds to those accounts?
22 A. I have no recollection of that figure, of that money.
23 Q. 710 It’s a huge amount of money, just as the last —
24 A. I agree —
25 Q. 711 — just as the last lodgement was, isn’t that right?
15:52:33
26 A. I agree.
27 Q. 712 And the second in this particular series I suggest to this one account. And
28 all the more memorable I suggest for that?
29 A. It should be memorable to me.
30 Q. 713 It should be. And why isn’t it?
15:52:49
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
133
1 A. It’s 14 years ago.
15:52:51
2 Q. 714 What has that got to do with it?
3 A. I —
4 Q. 715 You have seen the documents in front of you?
5 A. I have seen the documents. I have seen the documents. But I can’t imagine
15:53:01
6 that I would be comfortable in dealing with cash like that. It’s not in my
7 nature.
8 Q. 716 Ms. Carruth, I am sure that if you were working in a bank, if you were a bank
9 official and if you were dealing with these sort of figures every day it would
10 be, it would mean nothing to you to see a document 14 years later showing a
15:53:19
11 lodgement of 5,518 pounds?
12 A. I agree.
13 Q. 717 You were working as an office working for Mr. Ahern?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. 718 Isn’t that right?
15:53:34
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. 719 You were making about 66 pounds a week, isn’t that right?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. 720 You were being paid by Willdover, a company connected with Mr. Richardson in
20 relation to that. You were handling, I suggest, these monies as evidenced by
15:53:42
21 the fact that your signature appears on each one of the lodgement dockets,
22 isn’t that so?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. 721 How could you forget that you are dealing with these huge sums of money?
25 A. I have no idea. I have searched and tried and tried since this has come into
15:54:00
26 my home and I can’t recall anything that significant that I dealt with it.
27 Q. 722 But you accept as a probability that you did so handle it, you were in the bank
28 on this day and you did handle this amount of money?
29 A. Yes, I accept …
30 Q. 723 What was your reaction, Ms. Carruth, on getting this document which you accept
15:54:44
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
134
1 establishes that you were involved in these large cash transactions were you
15:54:49
2 surprised to receive this documentation?
3 A. Yes, I shook for two hours.
4 Q. 724 Right.
5 A. I was very surprised.
15:55:03
6 Q. 725 And what did you do about it? Did you go to your employer, Mr. Richardson or
7 Mr. Ahern, whichever it was, and inquire what they knew of these transactions
8 which apparently were conducted by you but which you apparently cannot
9 remember?
10 A. No, I didn’t go to anybody.
15:55:21
11 Q. 726 You went to nobody?
12 A. No.
13 Q. 727 Did you go to your fellow worker Ms. Sandra Cullagh to inquire whether she had
14 any recollection as to how it was that you came to be making these large
15 lodgements to the accounts?
15:55:36
16 A. No.
17 Q. 728 Of Mr. Ahern. No?
18 A. No, I didn’t go to Sandra.
19 Q. 729 Why not?
20 A. Because I believed it was a private matter and I was trying to deal with it as
15:55:45
21 quickly as I could to try and come back to the Tribunal on it.
22 Q. 730 You haven’t come back to the Tribunal until now, Ms. Carruth. And in coming
23 back to the Tribunal your input has been to say that you cannot recollect?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. 731 Yes.
15:56:08
26 A. Yes.
27 Q. 732 Is that your evidence on this issue, Ms. Carruth; that you cannot recollect any
28 of these transactions?
29 A. I can’t recollect them.
30 Q. 733 The next in sequence of the sizeable transactions is the lodgement of 3,970.19
15:56:34
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
135
1 pounds to the account of Mr. Ahern in October of 1994 at page 27296 or its
15:56:44
2 blanked equivalent as regards address. If we could have that on screen,
3 please. Again, this is a lodgement made by you to this account, isn’t that
4 right?
5 A. The lodgement, yes.
15:57:10
6 Q. 734 Made by you?
7 A. It’s a lodgement with my name on it, yes.
8 Q. 735 Let’s not beat about the bush, Ms. Carruth, is there any doubt in your mind but
9 that you made this lodgement to Ms. Ahern’s account?
10 A. I have no recollection of this.
15:57:30
11 Q. 736 Have you any doubt but that this was a lodgement made by you to Mr. Ahern’s
12 account?
13 A. The date isn’t mine, it’s not the way I do the date. On that account number.
14 It’s not the way I write the account number and the total is not my
15 handwriting.
15:57:51
16 Q. 737 You will see that that transaction, as with all of the others that we’ve looked
17 at earlier, was made on the same day, same branch with the same teller as a
18 foreign exchange transaction equating to the same six digits, page 27297;
19 3,970.19 pounds. Was the product of a 4,000 pounds Sterling exchange conducted
20 in that branch on that day, do you see that?
15:58:30
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. 738 Do you accept that the monies that you lodged to Mr. Ahern’s account were the
23 product of that foreign exchange transaction of 4,000 pounds?
24 A. No recollection of Sterling.
25
15:58:51
26 CHAIRMAN: Ms. Carruth, if you were completing these dockets with your name
27 and address, who — and if you weren’t making these lodgements or conducting
28 these transactions, who do you think would have been doing it in your place?
29 A. I have no idea, Judge.
30
15:59:09
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
136
1 CHAIRMAN: Is it almost certain that you would have had, having taken the
15:59:10
2 trouble to fill up this documentation which you — not what’s on screen but
3 what we saw a few moments ago with your name on it and address on it, you would
4 as a matter of virtual certainty, that it would have been you who would have
5 conducted the transaction or transactions in the bank?
15:59:32
6 A. Yes, Judge.
7
8 Q. 739 MR. O’NEILL: You have also given evidence, Ms. Carruth, to the effect that or
9 directly that the instructions that you received in every instance in relation
10 to these banking matters were given to you by Mr. Ahern, isn’t that right?
15:59:52
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. 740 There is no intermediary through whom you dealt with in connection with these
13 banking affairs, isn’t that so?
14 A. No.
15 Q. 741 So if it is the case that you got 6,000 pounds Sterling on the 9th of March or
16:00:07
16 5,450 pounds Sterling on the 9th of May or 4,000 pounds Sterling on the 28th of
17 October, these were all sums which came to you directly from Mr. Ahern?
18 A. It must be.
19 Q. 742 It must be. There’s no other explanation as to where these monies would have
20 come from, is that right?
16:00:45
21 A. I don’t know where the monies came from but anything that I was asked to do
22 was, in banking terms, was from Bertie.
23 Q. 743 Yes. And when you first gave your evidence to the Tribunal, that was limited,
24 as you say, to receiving a pay cheque every month which you would cash and you
25 would bring the proceeds of that back to him, alternatively, on some occasions
16:01:07
26 you would take some of the cash from your encashment of the cheque at the AIB
27 and you would go down to the Irish Permanent, which was very close to it, and
28 lodge amounts to the accounts of his daughters, isn’t that right?
29 A. Yes.
30 Q. 744 That was your evidence initially?
16:01:28
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
137
1 A. Yes.
16:01:32
2 Q. 745 Yes. Your recollection obviously of events has been improved somewhat by the
3 documents which have now been produced to you, isn’t that so?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. 746 Because that establishes that you were incorrect in believing that you never
16:01:45
6 lodged money to an account of Mr. Ahern’s, isn’t that so?
7 A. Yes.
8 Q. 747 You are incorrect in your belief that you never lodged cash to Mr. Ahern’s
9 accounts, isn’t that so?
10 A. Yes.
16:02:02
11 Q. 748 Could I suggest that you are also incorrect in your belief that you were not
12 dealing with large sums of Sterling?
13 A. I have no recollections in Sterling whatsoever.
14 Q. 749 But you have no recollection of anything, Ms. Carruth, have you?
15 A. I know.
16:02:20
16 Q. 750 Well what possible explanation can there be for you having no recollection of
17 transactions involving over 15,500 pounds in Sterling I suggest, conducted
18 through you in this one branch in an eight month period in a year 1994? How
19 could you possibly have no recollection of those events?
20 A. I just have no memories whatsoever of this, none. I remember lodging to his
16:02:52
21 daughter’s accounts, I’ve always said that but I have no memories of this.
22 Q. 751 Well if you remember lodging to his daughters accounts that was the very same
23 day that you lodged to his account, and that was the first of those lodgements
24 in sequence which we saw where you lodged the product of 1,000 pounds Sterling
25 to each of the girls accounts and you lodged 4,000 pounds Sterling Irish
16:03:16
26 equivalent to Mr. Ahern’s account?
27 A. It appears that way.
28 Q. 752 It’s four o’clock, Mr. Chairman.
29
30 CHAIRMAN: How long more do you think you will be?
16:03:37
Premier Captioning & Realtime Limited
www.pcr.ie Day 839
138
1
16:03:40
2 MR. O’NEILL: I won’t be too long more, Mr. Chairman. But there are matters I
3 would just like to check on the basis of the evidence which has been given now
4 by Ms. Carruth. It may be necessary for me to put specific matters to her.
5
16:03:55
6 CHAIRMAN: All right. I know you have domestic pressures. If we sit at half
7 past ten tomorrow.
8 A. I have three children, Judge. I don’t have baby minders.
9
10 CHAIRMAN: Well we have to deal with it tomorrow at some stage. Would eleven
16:04:10
11 o’clock suit you better than half ten? And you can be fairly certain that you
12 would be finished by lunchtime.
13
14 MR. MILLAR: There is a possibility, Chairman, of taking a few minutes and
15 then resuming maybe at a quarter past four and finishing today? Is that a
16 possibility?
17
18 CHAIRMAN: Well we have no difficulty. It’s just that if there are matters
19 …
20
21 MR. MILLAR: I know Mr. O’Neill.
22
23 MR. O’NEILL: It is a matter upon which Mr. Millar may in the light of the
24 evidence discuss with his client.
25
26 CHAIRMAN: I think in the circumstances it might be better if we continued
27 Ms. Carruth’s evidence tomorrow. And I think in the meantime, Ms. Carruth
28 should look again at the documentation, talk to your solicitor so that you will
29 be quite clear yourself as to what your position is in relation to the evidence
30 you are giving and the evidence you have given in the past.

2 So we will sit at half ten tomorrow.

6 THE TRIBUNAL THEN ADJOURNED UNTIL THE FOLLOWING DAY,
7 THURSDAY, 20TH MARCH 2008, AT 10:30 A.M:

ShareThis

This is new. Masterson et al said quite clearly in their book that St Luke’s was bought in 1988 for £57,000. £25,000 of this amount came from £1,000 donations from 25 individuals, “with further contributions over a five-year period”. The rest was mortgaged, with “the repayments paid through the constituency organisation’s own bank”. Another £50,000 was then spent on renovations.

The house was “assigned to five trustees”. They are not named in the book, but we now know they were Mr. Des Richardson, Mr. James Keane, Mr. Patrick Reilly, Mr. Joe Burke and Mr Tim Collins.

But the story is contradicted by Collins.

Q. 181 And where did that money come from?

A. By that, that money came from about 24 or 25 people that got together to buy it.

Meaning that the entirety of the house was paid for by those people. He also says the house was falling into the Liffey, though surely he meant the Tolka. Collins can’t remember it there was any debt on the house they bought it (Q207). O’Neill pushes him, asking again. Collins restates that 25 people paid for the house.

Masterson was quite clear that the house was vested with the Dublin Central Fianna Fail organisation. One of the legal documents drawn up says:

The trustees hereby acknowledge … I will read it as it is written here. “Are not to hold the property for their own absolute use and benefit but upon the trust here and after declared and as directed by the settlors of the trust the St. Luke’s club.” (Q219)

Club? What club? Collins is just as puzzled as I am.

The Tribunal have also been unable to find any evidence that there was any outstanding debt on the property.

ShareThis

Collins is being asked about the Davy cheque. He can’t remember anything about it. He can’t remember if he discussed it with Ahern. He can’t remember anything really. (Q77-83)

The Davy donation was the biggest. £5K. But he can’t explain to the Tribunal why the biggest donations intended for an election campaign ended up in an account that Collins now says was intended for the St Luke’s ‘Building Trust’.

“I can’t comment on that,” he says. (Q88)

“Well, no, the committee made the decision. We had four or five people, five people, and we’d have a meeting every week to ten days and a decision would be made — ”

The Tribunal asks who are these people.

Collins replies:

Paddy Reilly was, he is deceased.

Q. 92 Yes.

A. Jimmy Keane was.

Q. 93 Yes. He is deceased also.

A. He is deceased, yeah. Joe Burke I think is or was or is, I’m not sure, you know.

Q. 94 Yes.

A. Gerry Brennan, I’m not sure. He’s deceased, the solicitor.

Q. 95 Yes.

A. Myself, I was never a member of the Fianna Fail. Although I worked with them for years, you know.

Indeed.

ShareThis

ShareThis