Judgment is reserved in Gilligan drug trafficking case

MR JOHN GILLIGAN will learn on February 20th if he is to stand trial for drug trafficking offences in England after a London …

MR JOHN GILLIGAN will learn on February 20th if he is to stand trial for drug trafficking offences in England after a London Magistrate reserved judgment at the end of the committal hearing yesterday.

The stipendiary magistrate at Belmarsh Magistrate's court, Mr David Cooper, remanded Mr Gilligan (44) in custody until February 20th when he will announce his decision.

Mr Gilligan, who has described himself as the prime suspect for the murder of journalist Veronica Guerin, was arrested on October 6th, 1996, at Heathrow Airport, London, attempting to board a flight to Amsterdam carrying £330,000 hidden in his luggage.

He is charged with concealing property which represents the proceeds of drug trafficking assisting another to retain the benefit of drug trafficking and attempting to removed from the UK the proceeds of drug trafficking.

READ MORE

Closing his case for the prosecution, Mr Nigel Peters QC told the court that Mr Dermot Cambridge a key witness against Mr Gilligan, had refused to travel to England to give evidence yesterday because he had received a number of threatening phone calls and was "frightened for his life".

In a statement to gardai on February 3rd, Mr Cambridge said he had received the calls threatening to kill him, his girlfriend and his child after he had been informed that he was to be called as a key prosecution witness.

Despite Mr Cambridge's failure to attend court, Mr Peters argued that his statements detailing the transfer arrangements of cardboard boxes from Cork to Dublin and identifying them as ones which were later seized by gardai from a warehouse leased to Mr Gilligan and found to contain cannabis, should be admitted as evidence.

However, Ms Clare Montgomery QC, representing Mr Gilligan, suggested Mr Cambridge's fears for his life should be regarded with a "great deal of suspicion" and questioned his positive identification of the boxes.

Ms Montgomery pointed out that the defence had been unable to cross examine Mr Cambridge about his statements and argued if they were admitted as evidence it would be unfair to Mr Gilligan.

Ruling to admit all of Mr Cambridge's statements as evidence, Mr Cooper said the court was "satisfied that the witness is in fear" and that he did not consider their admission would "result in unfairness to the defendant".