The Mahon Tribunal - Consequences

[musashi]

O'Callaghan does have a point. Our corruption laws are so outdated that they are not fit for purpose in the 21st century. Of course, they were allowed stand as they were because it suited corrupt politicians and their apparachtiks to keep them that way.

I read the IT report with mounting indifference. O'Callaghan's been playing the long game. He'll never see the inside of a jail cell. He'll tie the Tribunal up in legal knots for the remainder of his natural life.

Whether or not our anti-corruption regulations are fit for purpose is the nub of it alright.

[toxic avenger]

O'Callaghan does have a point. Our corruption laws are so outdated that they are not fit for purpose in the 21st century. Of course, they were allowed stand as they were because it suited corrupt politicians and their apparachtiks to keep them that way.

Two £10,000 payments were made by O'Callaghan, one to Liam Lawlor, one (only admitted a long way into the tribunal's hearings) to Colm McGrath (FF councillor). They were paid out of his company Riga Limited. They were marked down in the accounts as 'sundry expenses', with a marginalia note to AIB saying that he would 'explain these Friday' at a meeting with them. The purpose of the payments was kept off the books.

He then charged that money to the company he shared with Tom Gilmartin and AIB, Barkhill Limited, without ever telling Tom Gilmartin (who he admitted would never have consented to such payments), specifically charged to Tom Gilmartin's Director's Loan account.

He paid huge amounts of money to politicians, hid that fact, and then reimbursed himself from someone he knew would have opposed it without telling that person what the reimbursement was for.

O'Callaghan is hoping that people will believe that he was the victim of a procedure which relied on the hearsay evidence of a witness he portrays as unreliable. But, in fact, the vast majority of evidence against O'Callaghan is completely independent of Gilmartin's allegations - the above being one example, another being the huge amount of money wired to Frank Dunlop in a hurry on an afternoon that Dunlop met a senior politician he refuses to name in Powers Hotel.

[Slim Buddha]

Two £10,000 payments were made by O'Callaghan, one to Liam Lawlor, one (only admitted a long way into the tribunal's hearings) to Colm McGrath (FF councillor). They were paid out of his company Riga Limited. They were marked down in the accounts as 'sundry expenses', with a marginalia note to AIB saying that he would 'explain these Friday' at a meeting with them. The purpose of the payments was kept off the books.

He then charged that money to the company he shared with Tom Gilmartin and AIB, Barkhill Limited, without ever telling Tom Gilmartin (who he admitted would never have consented to such payments), specifically charged to Tom Gilmartin's Director's Loan account.

He paid huge amounts of money to politicians, hid that fact, and then reimbursed himself from someone he knew would have opposed it without telling that person what the reimbursement was for.

O'Callaghan is hoping that people will believe that he was the victim of a procedure which relied on the hearsay evidence of a witness he portrays as unreliable. But, in fact, the vast majority of evidence against O'Callaghan is completely independent of Gilmartin's allegations - the above being one example, another being the huge amount of money wired to Frank Dunlop in a hurry on an afternoon that Dunlop met a senior politician he refuses to name in Powers Hotel.

My point, toxic, is that the corruption laws are not suitable for the reality of life today and need updating. I have no doubt that what you write above is true for this particular case. I am speaking more generally and the outdated law on corruption, like that also of libel, serves the public it is supposed to serve badly and appears to err in the practice on the side of those who wish to exploit it.

[yehbut_nobut]

Two £10,000 payments were made by O'Callaghan, one to Liam Lawlor, one (only admitted a long way into the tribunal's hearings) to Colm McGrath (FF councillor). They were paid out of his company Riga Limited. They were marked down in the accounts as 'sundry expenses', with a marginalia note to AIB saying that he would 'explain these Friday' at a meeting with them. The purpose of the payments was kept off the books.

He then charged that money to the company he shared with Tom Gilmartin and AIB, Barkhill Limited, without ever telling Tom Gilmartin (who he admitted would never have consented to such payments), specifically charged to Tom Gilmartin's Director's Loan account.

He paid huge amounts of money to politicians, hid that fact, and then reimbursed himself from someone he knew would have opposed it without telling that person what the reimbursement was for.

O'Callaghan is hoping that people will believe that he was the victim of a procedure which relied on the hearsay evidence of a witness he portrays as unreliable. But, in fact, the vast majority of evidence against O'Callaghan is completely independent of Gilmartin's allegations - the above being one example, another being the huge amount of money wired to Frank Dunlop in a hurry on an afternoon that Dunlop met a senior politician he refuses to name in Powers Hotel.

Great! Everything you stated is now a matter of public record, so it'll be good that the public continue to be reminded of just what went on. And just maybe as a bonus, come the October hearing we'll even get to hear who the unamed politician was! Bring it on, I say.

[Stanley 2]

Great! Everything you stated is now a matter of public record, so it'll be good that the public continue to be reminded of just what went on. And just maybe as a bonus, come the October hearing we'll even get to hear who the unamed politician was! Bring it on, I say.

Frank Dunlop aint about to give this name up, he has sacrificed all the little people to protect the great and the few, who have bankrolled him for years, probably still doing so.

[Stanley 2]

As part of the Quarryvale zoning issue, Liam Lawlor suggested to Owen O'Callaghan that he should use the original town centre site at Neilstown for something else in order to provide an alternative use for the site and thus sway some councillors who were still ambivalent about voting to confirm the rezoning in December 1992. Lawlor suggested a stadium. An arrangement arose whereby O'Callaghan, Lawlor, Dunlop, and architect Ambrose Kelly were each to take a 25% stake in the proposed stadium. Nobody bothered to tell any of this to Tom Gilmartin, who was 40% owner of the original site.

In the course of campaigning for this project, O'Callaghan became involved with a US investment firm called Chilton O'Connor. Liam Lawlor's son, Niall Lawlor, worked for them in Los Angeles. Senior people at this firm met Bertie Ahern in Los Angeles in March 1994, and in Dublin in November 1994. They also met Albert Reynolds in Dublin. The US investors, along with O'Callaghan and Dunlop, were looking for state funding to the tune of £5million at least, and tax designation as well.

The Tribunal have found that the evidence of Ahern, Dunlop, and O'Callaghan about their contacts at this time were not credible. The three of them had claimed, among other accounts of their contacts that were rejected by the Tribunal, that Ahern had rejected any help for the stadium project in November 1994, and that he was so blunt about it that Bill O'Connor of Chilton O'Connor was 'offended', according to Dunlop. The Tribunal found letters and other evidence to prove that this could not be true. The project was still alive and well later in November, and O'Connor wrote a very cheery note to Ahern congratulating him on becoming leader of Fianna Fáil.

They also rejected Dunlop's account of a sudden and mad dash to New York that month to meet Mr. O'Connor, despite O'Connor arriving in Dublin 4 days later to meet Ahern.

So why the untruths from O'Callaghan, Dunlop, and Ahern?

And what, if anything, does this have to do with $45,000 turning up in Ahern's accounts the following month?

Also - why was the then Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, visiting Frank Dunlop in secret soon after Dunlop confessed to perjury and bribery in April 2000 at the Tribunal?

Anyone know if Lawlor's estate stands to benefit from legal costs at Mahon or when is a decision to be made.

IMO his property should be sold off to pay these costs, he was one of the greatest obstructionist at Mahon in concert with other FFers and their mates, his family should not benefit as they themselves did not co-operate, his missus will be on a nice pension.

[Andrew49]

Clondalkin councillor Therese Ridge, who faced disciplinary proceedings from Fine Gael following adverse findings in the Mahon Report, has resigned from the party. Source

Apparently the resignation is due to her being unable to get 'fair procedures' within Fine Gael ....

[musashi]

Clondalkin councillor Therese Ridge, who faced disciplinary proceedings from Fine Gael following adverse findings in the Mahon Report, has resigned from the party. Source

Apparently the resignation is due to her being unable to get 'fair procedures' within Fine Gael ....

Back in the day, Fine Gael started another inquiry into their members' asking for bribes off business interests. It was a sham from beginning to end - Ridge and Mitchell were investigated and exonerated.

Her response to a previous question, “Are any of your colleagues on the take” by an internal Fine Gael investigation into corruption within their ranks [Ridge replied] “Tom Hand may have had a different approach than the rest of us.”

After John Bruton infamously said of the whole affair: "Neither Fine Gael or the world are populated by angels.”

Several weeks passed before transcripts of the exchanges were discovered discarded in the Dáil car park.

[Stanley 2]

From the journal.ie
Fagan's
22/03/12 # Comment reported, thank you
Report this comment
7 16 "The state has got nearly a billion back in tax and fines etc form the participants. It turned quite a profit. It also has exposed FF criminality at its highest points. That is an investment in all out futures.

My question is will the report reveal who the mysterious M.Martin who met a developed in a car park with Bertie was. What did they talk about, were there envelopes in the neighbourhood.

FF have stated that it is not Micheal Martin, their leader. I go to the report hoping to find out who it was. A Maurice Martin or Martin Martin, here I come. I have no doubt that it was not Michael, as that would mean he was lying and he would not be where he is, if he was a liar. It would not be tolerated."




Does anyone know what the Report said about this M.Martin ?

[Baron von Biffo]

Does anyone know what the Report said about this M.Martin ?

The report is here.

[PaddyJoe]

From the journal.ie
Fagan's
22/03/12 # Comment reported, thank you
Report this comment
7 16 "The state has got nearly a billion back in tax and fines etc form the participants. It turned quite a profit. It also has exposed FF criminality at its highest points. That is an investment in all out futures.

My question is will the report reveal who the mysterious M.Martin who met a developed in a car park with Bertie was. What did they talk about, were there envelopes in the neighbourhood.

FF have stated that it is not Micheal Martin, their leader. I go to the report hoping to find out who it was. A Maurice Martin or Martin Martin, here I come. I have no doubt that it was not Michael, as that would mean he was lying and he would not be where he is, if he was a liar. It would not be tolerated."




Does anyone know what the Report said about this M.Martin ?

A reminder here:

Sinead Desmond (presenter): “You’re representing a new Fianna Fail, but then I was thinking about two things from your past. One of them being a – totally legitimate – donation by [Cork property developer] Owen O’Callaghan that found its way into your wife’s Dublin bank account. That seemed strange to me and had a sniff of the old Fianna Fail. And the second thing, in the Mahon Tribunal you were asked if you ever brought Owen O’Callaghan to meet Bertie Ahern and you said no that you would have remembered if such a thing happened. And then you were shown Mr Ahern’s ministerial diary which seemed to recollect a meeting between yourself, Bertie Ahern and Owen O’Callaghan but you said you couldn’t recall it. I’ll give you a chance to explain but both of those incidents smell of the old Fianna Fail that put ourselves in the position we find ourselves in.”

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2012/03/05/...ibunal-report/

[Stanley 2]

A reminder here:

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2012/03/05/...ibunal-report/

Thanks, all the old FF answers, he sells more dummies than Jonny Sexton.

[musashi]

Desmond: “What about the meeting mentioned in The Mahon Tribunal.”

Martin: “I never had a meeting with Bertie and Owen O’Callaghan.”

Desmond: “It’s all there recorded in his diary.”

Martin: “But it wasn’t you see even the tribunal itself didn’t seem to be going into (pause) I don’t want to be going into this because it’s based on the report (pause) didn’t seem to be too clear about it (pause) never any indication in advance that that was going to be raised (pause) I certainly didn’t…(trails off)”

http://www.broadsheet.ie/2012/03/05/...ribunal-report

Supposing he was there, does that lend credence to allegations about him accepting that other sum

[disability student]

I wonder why are they bringing this one up now ? is this new tactic to counteract re O Reilly' conflict of interest or to drown down the news??

[Stanley 2]

I wonder why are they bringing this one up now ? is this new tactic to counteract re O Reilly' conflict of interest or to drown down the news??

Eh ? TMK it is just a discussion on this site between a few who dont believe MeHole's statements.