Bovale Developments paid Mr James Gogarty £32,000 in 1996 to "get rid of him", because he was threatening to expose Mr Michael Bailey's role in facilitating a donation to Mr Ray Burke, the tribunal heard yesterday.
Mr Brian O'Moore, counsel for Mr Gogarty, said the money was an attempt to pay Mr Gogarty off because he had been "threatening" Mr Bailey and his brother Tom.
However, Mr Bailey said the payment was part of the deal for the Murphy lands, which included a £150,000 " finder's fee" for Mr Gogarty for arranging the sale.
Mr O'Moore said a meeting in June/July 1996 at Mr Gogarty's home took place so the payment could be made and so Mr Gogarty's threats to go to press with the story could be dealt with.
"Isn't the fact of the matter that he was threatening yourself and your brother prior to the meeting of June/July 1996 and that is why you came along to pay him off and get rid of him?" asked Mr O'Moore.
"We were paying our indebtedness to Jim Gogarty as part of the Murphy deal," Mr Bailey replied.
Mr O'Moore asked Mr Bailey if he trusted Mr Gogarty at that stage. "I have to say that I always had great admiration for Jim Gogarty," he said.
"This is a man who you agreed with Mr Cooney yesterday was evil," said Mr O'Moore.
"But I still have admiration for him, because I am not a man that will hold a grudge. If he died in the morning I would be the first man to be at his funeral," said Mr Bailey.
"I'd say you would," said Mr O'Moore.
"And I wouldn't be going with any other intentions but to sympathise with his family for what he's after putting them through. Did you hear what I said, Mr O'Moore? - to sympathise with his family for what he is actually after putting them through," Mr Bailey said.
Mr O'Moore said Mr Bailey's account of events had "changed enormously" since last March.
"Do you accept that there have been significant changes in your case as described by Mr Allen [Mr Colm Allen SC for Bovale Developments] on March 25th, 1999, and the evidence given by you over the last two weeks?" asked Mr O'Moore.
"Maybe some inconsistencies, but I am saying to you and the chairman here what I believe the position is," said Mr Bailey.
"I am putting it to you that this was a conscious change of story on your part and that when you saw the line that you were pushing in March wasn't going to hold water you changed your story," Mr O'Moore said.
"You're wrong," Mr Bailey replied. Mr O'Moore said there were several problems with Mr Bailey's claim he paid the £150,000 " finder's fee" in the form of £50,000 in cash and two post-dated cheques for £50,000 each.
"If your cock-and-bull story about £150,000 in cash was true, Mr Gogarty would have insisted on that [the cash] before he sold the land at all, isn't that right?" asked Mr O'Moore. Mr Bailey said it was not right. He was "sorry" he had not paid Mr Gogarty £150,000 in cash initially.
Mr O'Moore said if Mr Bailey had stopped the two post-dated cheques, which were a form of security for subsequent cash payments, Mr Gogarty would not have got "a bob" out of Mr Bailey. He said for Mr Gogarty to agree with such an arrangement would be out of character.
Mr O'Moore referred to the £150,000 "finder's fee" requested from Mr Bailey by Mr Gogarty for putting together the sale of the Murphy lands to Bovale Developments asking, "what did you think of the demand for the £50,000 when it was first raised with you?"
"Well, I was surprised, but if I thought I was going to get the deal, I was prepared to pay it," replied Mr Bailey.
"Well, Mr Gogarty hadn't looked for a finder's fee for Forest Road, had he?" asked Mr O'Moore. "No," said Mr Bailey. "It must have been quite amazing, when this other transaction a year later he looks for a fee of this size - were you amazed?," Mr O'Moore asked.
"Well, I agreed to the fee. I wasn't amazed, no," Mr Bailey responded.