Landmark ruling by judge relating to admitting evidence

During the trial of former Fianna Fáil TD Michael Collins, the presiding judge delivered a landmark ruling in relation to the…

During the trial of former Fianna Fáil TD Michael Collins, the presiding judge delivered a landmark ruling in relation to the admission of certain evidence from the defendant's accountant.

After 1½ days of legal argument, Judge Carroll Moran ruled that most of the evidence furnished by the accused to his accountant, who passed it on to the Revenue Commissioners on the instructions of his client, was inadmissible in a criminal trial.

During his evidence, given in the absence of the jury, the accountant explained that Mr Collins had come to him for advice in 2003 after he received an inquiry letter from the Revenue Commissioners concerning a bogus non-resident account.

Mr Collins told the accountant that he had used a bogus non-resident account for some undeclared income from the Railway Hotel, of which he had been a proprietor, and his accountant advised him to make a declaration, the court heard.

READ MORE

The defence argued that this information was provided to the Revenue Commissioners for the purpose of settling Mr Collins's tax affairs and with the understanding that he would not be prosecuted.

Judge Moran said the contents of two letters sent to Michael Collins in 2003 by the Revenue Commissioners did not explicitly state there would be no prosecution if he co-operated.

However, he said "any sensible person would be entitled to draw the inference that he or she would not be prosecuted if he or she co-operated in the terms of the letters".

Judge Moran insisted that there was no question of wrongdoing or impropriety by the Revenue Commissioners or the Garda Síochána, whose job it is to induce tax evaders to come forward.

However, he said in a criminal matter the accused is not obliged to incriminate themselves involuntarily, as is "long established in Irish law".

The judge added that his ruling should be a comfort to all citizens as it would be used in their interest should they ever be prosecuted by the institutions of the State.