Adam Clayton’s former PA loses appeal to reduce sentence

U2 bass player Adam Clayton’s former personal assistant has lost her appeal against a seven year jail sentence imposed on her for stealing from him.

Last week, the Court of Criminal Appeal dismissed Carol Hawkins’ appeal against her conviction.

The issue of severity of sentence was put back until today when the court said since no error of principle had been identified in the appeal, the court would not interfere with the sentence.

The seven year sentence was imposed on her by Judge Patrick McCartan at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court in July 2012.

Neither Hawkins, who at her trial denied the charges, nor Mr Clayton were present in court for the judgment.

Her appeals were opposed by the Director of Public Prosecutions.

Her lawyer, Ken Fogarty SC, argued she would be “forever known” as the person who committed these offences against Mr Clayton.

There was a “significant amount of public notoriety” about the case, he said.

She would have to “change her identity” in order to attain any degree of anonymity after she is released from the Dochas Centre, where she is currently detained, he said.

A number of education reports on Hawkins were submitted to the court and since she was jailed. She had been a model prisoner, the appeal judges were told.

Counsel for the DPP Colm Ó Briain Bl argued the seven year sentence was “proper and appropriate” given the serious nature of the offences.

Hawkins (51), originally from north London but with a last address at Lower Rathmines Road, Dublin,was convicted of 181 counts of theft from two of Mr Clayton’s Bank of Ireland accounts over a four year period from 2004 to 2008.

The thefts totalled just over €2.8m.

She used the money to purchase and maintain 22 thoroughbred racehorses, a €310,000 New York apartment, holidays, education for her children and shopping sprees.

She also spent €1.4 million on her credit card funded from Mr Clayton’s accounts.

Giving the three judge court’s decision, Mr Justice Peter Charleton said the trial judge “scoured the evidence” with a view to finding some mitigating factor in deciding the sentence.

The trial judge found there was the factor of co-operation which she belatedly offered in relation to securing the New York apartment for Mr Clayton.

The judge also found “some grain of evidence” in her favour by noticing she had not perjured herself and had not given instructions to her counsel which would have required him (counsel) to engage in any direct challenge to credibility “which could have been upsetting”, Mr Justice Charleton said.

“In consequence, the approach of the trial judge was correct in principle and showed appropriate regard both to rehabilitation and mercy”, he said.