I’ve read the transcript. Staggering stuff really. Some of it could be construed as misleading or obstructing the Tribunal.
Who wants to do a podcast of the entire thing, but made quicker? Would anyone listen to it?
I’m sure I could master the high moral tones of counsel for the Tribunal.
Update: Thanks Cian. The request by Ahern’s solicitor to only look at amounts above 30k looks like the one to me, and restricting to dates between 1989 and 1992. The Tribunal seem to have accepted the 30k rule, but then later said hang on…(Circa question 91 onwards, Q. 96 being the nail on the head by counsel for the Tribunal).
And of course Ahern did not have any accounts between those years either.
Ahern knew there were amounts of withdrawals of more than 30k from Larkin’s account but for his benefit, but in smaller tranches, and seems to have failed to tell the Tribunal until very much later.