‘Slab’ Murphy not ‘remotely close’ to bail threshold , judge says

Prominent republican Thomas ‘Slab’ Murphy would not “remotely come close” to meeting the threshold required for bail pending an appeal, his lawyers have been told.

The 66-year-oldof Ballybinaby, Hackballscross, Co Louth is due to appeal his conviction for tax evasion in the Court of Appeal in November.

Murphy had pleaded not guilty at the non-jury Special Criminal Court to nine charges of failing to comply with tax laws .

The three-judge Special Criminal Court found him guilty on all counts and he was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment on February 26th last.

Murphy’s appeal against conviction has been allocated three hearing days in November. An application for bail was lodged on his behalf earlier this week which was listed for hearing next Friday by officials in the Court of Appeal office.

His barrister, Tony McGillicuddy BL, told Mr Justice George Birmingham on Friday that his side felt it appropriate to mention the matter during case management procedures.

However, Mr Justice Birmingham told Mr McGillicuddy that there was no reality to a bail application being heard.

Mr McGillicuddy said he appreciated the court had a very heavy list next week but Murphy “would like” the bail application “to be considered by the court”.

Counsel suggested the court assess the points of appeal and if, at that juncture, it felt the threshold could be satisfied, the court could come to a view without the need for oral submissions.

Threshold for Bail

Mr Justice Birmingham said the view of his colleagues was that “the case wouldn’t remotely come close” to meeting the threshold required for bail as laid down by case law.

What Murphy had done, the judge said, was to say “‘I was convicted after a lengthy trial; I have prepared 150 pages of legal submissions and 48 grounds of appeal. Find a point in there somewhere.’”

Mr Justice Birmingham said Murphy had already been facilitated to an unusual degree in that he was given a date for hearing before submissions were ready because the court did not want dates blocked off for what will be a three day appeal.

“He will have to wait until November 8th,” the judge said, the date set for Murphy’s appeal hearing.

Murphy was not in court for the procedural matter.

Conviction

Last December, following a 32-day trial, Murphy was found guilty of nine charges of failing to furnish a return of his income, profits or gains or the source of his income, profits or gains to the Collector General or the Inspector of Taxes for the years 1996/97 to 2004.

The court had heard evidence that the Criminal Assets Bureau’s (Cab) assessment of Murphy’s tax bill is worth €5,344,157 and that from farming income, the issue for which Murphy was tried before the court, he owes €189,964 .

The estimated loss to Revenue is based on the “notional figure” of €15,000 or £15,000 (Irish) per year profit from Murphy’s farming business, the court had heard

During the trial, the court heard evidence that, although Murphy conducted dealings in relation to cattle and land, and received farming grants from the Department of Agriculture, he failed to make any returns to revenue.

From 1996 to 2004, he received grants from the Department of Agriculture totalling over €100,000 .

The court also heard of a search carried out by the Cab in March 2006 in an outhouse on the Border with Northern Ireland, when investigators seized a large volume of documents and ledgers, cash worth €256,235 and £111,185 (Sterling), as well as uncashed cheques worth €579,000, £80,000 (Sterling) and £24,000 (Irish).

Evidence from livestock mart managers was that Murphy purchased cattle with a total value of over €500,000. Meat factory managers told the court that he sold cattle with a total value of over €200,000 .

The court also heard evidence of a bank account opened in Murphy’s name which, at the judgement hearing last December, Mr Justice Butler said was “operated by [Murphy] to his benefit”.

Murphy’s defence lawyers had claimed that his brother, Patrick, was in control of the farming activities and was therefore the chargeable person. A chargeable person is a person who is chargeable to tax on income.

Publicity

Passing sentence at the non-jury Special Criminal Court in February, presiding judge Mr Justice Paul Butler said the court’s decision was not influenced by the publicity surrounding the trial.

Mr Justice Butler said that, during the trial, “some commentary referred to other unconnected matters” and that the court was “aware of the publicity”.

“It has no bearing on the revenue charges brought against [Murphy},” the judge said, adding that the court was “in no way influenced” by the publicity. The court tried Murphy as a “farmer and cattle dealer,” the judge said.

After sentencing, in a statement issued via his solicitor, Murphy had said he maintains his innocence and had instructed his legal team to “pursue an appeal immediately”.