Thursday, March 23, 2006
Murphy’s assets frozen
Following the raids at the start of the month in Monaghan and Armagh, RTÉ reports that the High Court has granted orders freezing the assets seized in the searches, the estimate value of the property and cash is €900,000 and the court has appointed the legal officer of the CAB as receiver. From RTÉ - “The orders were made against Thomas Murphy, his brothers Francis and Patrick, and ACE Oils, which CAB says is a consortium owned and controlled by the Murphy group. CAB officers served the High Court documents at the Murphy addresses this morning.” Whether Sinn Féin president Gerry Adams will be revising his opinion of Thomas Murphy is currently unknown.. Although it’s worth pointing out that no charges have emerged yet. Update It’s not included in the RTÉ report but UTV claim Thomas Murphy’s house is covered by the court orders More over the fold
The BBC report restricts the court orders to cash and cheques seized during the searches, but values them at over €1million -
The order was made under the Proceeds of Crime Act against Mr Murphy, his brothers Patrick and Francis and Ace Oils Ltd.
The company has a registered office at Ballybinaby, Hackballscross in County Louth.
And has more details on the properties searched, and the Crimnal Assets Bureau investigation -
The head of the Criminal Assets Bureau, Detective Chief Superintendent Felix McKenna, said in documents supplied to the court that the cash and cheques were found in black plastic bags in a cattle shed owned by Patrick Murphy adjacent to his residence.
Access to the shed was through a gate on a road on the Northern Ireland side of the border which opened out on to a farm complex owned by the Murphys, the court heard.
Access from the southern side of the border was through a field registered in the name of Patrick Murphy’s wife, Rosemary, the judge was told.
Detective Chief Supt McKenna said in the documents that the CAB had been investigating the Murphys “for some considerable time”, and that Tom, Frank and Patrick Murphy had for the past 20 years been involved in the oil distribution industry and oil smuggling and money laundering activities.
Pete Baker @ 04:07 PM
Hi,
Gerry had better watch himself!
Posted by on Mar 23, 2006 @ 05:42 PMI still laugh to myself when I remember Slab being described as a “pig farmer” who “led a frugal life”. I think the comments were attributed to Adams, but don’t quote me on that.
[See commenting policy - edited Moderator]
Posted by on Mar 23, 2006 @ 06:48 PMConcerned Loyalist, you’re an apologist for the UDA. What business do you have getting upset about other people’s criminality ?
It sounds like a lot of illegal contraband has been lifted by the police. Let’s see how well they manage to make it stick - will Murphy have his day in court ?
Posted by on Mar 23, 2006 @ 07:09 PMComrade Stalin
No doubt old Slab will be hoping his “day in court” will be more successful than his last few.
Posted by on Mar 23, 2006 @ 07:54 PMTom Murphy will be remembered in songs and history books when the minnows who now snap at his ankles are long forgotten. Good or bad let history judge.
Posted by on Mar 23, 2006 @ 08:49 PMMick I think you should be the bard and come up with a line or two for us…
Posted by on Mar 23, 2006 @ 09:05 PMWhatever of it all, if the highest total value of property and cash against which a freezing order was taken against a substantial piece of land and buildings in a prime location is considerably less than £1m, then that would point more to Mr Murphy’s lack of personal material condiderations. Ask any estate agent.
On this basis Mr Murphy appears a most honest man.
Reports of his lifestyle would tend to confirm this.I doubt that any of the holding charges will get as far as trial.
The main charges so far levied against Mr Murphy in the British press seem to be that he is “middle-aged”, that his body mass is “bulky” and that he is “balding”. Oh, and I forgot, “He is Irish”.
Now that a new biopic of Pierrepoint is in the offing no doubt nostalgic memories of hanging Irishmen will be invoked. I’m not so sure it will prove fashionable.
Posted by on Mar 23, 2006 @ 09:19 PM“The main charges so far levied against Mr Murphy in the British press”
And in the Irish press, Rory, and by the Gardai, and by the Criminal Assets Bureau.. and upheld by the Irish High Court in their issuing of the court orders.
“On this basis Mr Murphy appears a most honest man.”
What basis would that be?.. the Irish jury verdict noted by the Sunday Times report of the libel trial?
I do, however, agree that he should face trial in a criminal court for the charges that have been levelled. Let’s hope he gets his day in court.
Posted by on Mar 23, 2006 @ 09:25 PMMick Hall:
Tom Murphy will be remembered in songs and history books when the minnows who now snap at his ankles are long forgotten.
He’s a simple farmer trying to irk an honest living. What are people doing writing songs and history books about him ?
Posted by on Mar 23, 2006 @ 09:46 PMEven the dogs on the street know who Slab is. For Mick, Gerry or Rory to say such bile drivel is only Another brick in the Wall. Who do these people think we are? Stickies?
Posted by on Mar 23, 2006 @ 09:59 PMI’ve noticed that the sinn fein heads seem to be huge proponents of the presumption of innocence, constantly reminding us that republicans are innocent until proven guilty. Seems their grasp of legal matters is about as good as their taxation expertise. Mr. Murphy isn’t “innocent until proven guilty.” The presumption of innocence is purely an aspect of a criminal trial in due course of law. It cannot be divorced from this context and effectively, only exists as a colloquialism outside of this context. Sinn fein/IRA will be well aware of this by the time the CAB boys finish with them. Murphy isn’t facing a criminal trial in due course of law. He’s facing into civil proceedings, in that CAB merely have to establish on the balance of probabilities that the property seized by CAB represents the proceeds of crime. Now ,given that a jury was convinced of Murphy’s involvement in crime in the Times libel action, on the same standard of proof relevant to the ongoing CAB proceedings, it seems very unlikely that the High Court is going to decide that Murphy’s money does not in fact represent the proceeds of crime. I’d say the only way he’ll wiggle out of this one is if the CAB boys made a balls of the warrent, or some other technicality, again, very unlikely considering that the CAB boys, unlike normal cops, are under the supervision of an able legal officer. His name escapes me, it used to be Barry Galvin, a pretty decent legal eagle. Maybe Murphy will be able to convince Justice Finnegan in the High Court that money laundering isn’t a crime because emmmmm it’s only a crime when ‘good republicans’ aren’t involved. Still though, Sinn fein should be delighted in a way, since they believe that no-one should have the right to private property. Presumably, CAB are merely implementing Sinn Fein’s economic policies. I wonder if Paddy Power are offering odds on Sinn Fein returning no seats at the next election, cos I’d say this won’t be the only CAB case against Adams’ chums in the run up to the next election. Looking forward to McKenna’s evidence in the High Court when he reveals the IRA for the criminals that they are, smuggling fags and petrol, and lining their pockets. Gas altogether really, I’d say McDowell is tickled pink.
Posted by on Mar 23, 2006 @ 10:10 PMOld Slab Murphy had a farm
Tiocfaidh oh ar la
And on that farm there was a barn
..etc, etcFrank Aiken from county Armagh fought the Brits for a couple of years and was made Minister of Foreign Affairs for his troubles.
Slab alledgedly fought the Brits for 30 years but he gets hounded by bureaucrats!!
To those who make politically motivated allegations of criminality against Slab my question is simple:
Why would a smuggler fight to get rid of a border he was profiting from?
Posted by on Mar 23, 2006 @ 10:13 PMAre you saying, Pete Barker, that the Irish press, the Gardai and the Criminal Assets bureau also deemed Mr Murphy guilty of being middle aged, bulky, balding and Irish and that the Irish High Court upheld their convictions? That is what your response to my post indicates. Perhaps you didn’t mean it.
Why do you not address the main thrust of my post which considers that given that the most value that could be squeezed for freezing out of Mr Murphy’s assets indicates that he is rather less than the millionaire smuggling warlord than the powers that be and their “free press” minions would have us believe.
I say again - I do not expect any charges against Mr Murphy to proceed to trial - any evidence, however scant, would surely have been trumpeted by now. The stark fact that the prosecuting authorities’ bagmen in the press cannot even come up with some good inventive evidence augurs ill for the prosecution.
Posted by on Mar 23, 2006 @ 10:53 PMPeople seem to have missed this.
.......Although it’s worth pointing out that no charges have emerged yet.
I thought people were presumed innocent.
Guess that one has gone out the window.
Posted by on Mar 23, 2006 @ 11:00 PM“Why would a smuggler fight to get rid of a border he was profiting from?”
- an excellent question Elfinto, to which I can only add: Why would people trying to unite Ireland use violence to divide it?
Perhaps we can get an answer to your question shortly after the whole of Ireland has finally received an answer to mine.
Posted by on Mar 23, 2006 @ 11:08 PMWell you, deliberately[?] mis-spell my name, while you remain anonymous, but I will respond to your accusations, Rory.
“Why do you not address the main thrust of my post which considers that given that the most value that could be squeezed for freezing out of Mr Murphy’s assets indicates that he is rather less than the millionaire smuggling warlord than the powers that be and their “free press” minions would have us believe.”
Well, because you claimed, “if the highest total value of property and cash against which a freezing order was taken against a substantial piece of land and buildings in a prime location is considerably less than £1m, then that would point more to Mr Murphy’s lack of personal material condiderations.”
When that wasn’t the claim of the reports noted in the original post - all information provided in that post, btw.
and you went on to claim that - “The main charges so far levied against Mr Murphy in the British press seem to be that he is “middle-aged”, that his body mass is “bulky” and that he is “balding”. Oh, and I forgot, “He is Irish”.”
When that is far from being the accusation levelled against Mr Murphy.
As I said, I hope he gets his day in court. I trust you do too?
Posted by on Mar 23, 2006 @ 11:09 PMAgain, pol, republicans seem to think that ‘presumed innocent’ applies to proceedings involving the Criminal Assets Bureau. Under the proceeds of Crime Act, 1996, the onus is now on mr. murphy to demonstrate that the money seized DOES NOT represent the proceeds of criminal activity. under the 1996 Act, the Court may accept the evidence of the Chief Bureau officer as evidence that the property in question constitutes the proceeds of crime. AGAIN I REPEAT the presumption of innocence does not apply to the forfeiture proceedings that mr. murphy is facing into, the presumption of innocence only applies to criminal proceedings, CAB hearings are civil proceedings. It’s going to be hilarious to see the look on the Shinners faces when the CAB boys start freezing everything which relates to the IRA’s criminal activity over the past 30 years.
Rory, the reason the Criminal Assets Bureau didn’t freeze Mr. Murphy’s dwelling house is because it didn’t represent the proceeds of crime. It’s his home, I assume he can point to the fact that he inherited it, or otherwise obtained it legitimately. On the other hand, the CAB have seized assets from him which they have proven to the High Court represent the Proceeds of Crime. Your assertion that this won’t go to trial is wrong; THE TRIAL HAS STARTED, CAB have obtained an order from the High Court freezing the 900,000 they found on his farm, evidence to this end has obviously been delivered to the High Court, this is why Slab’s hot money is currently resting in a CAB bank account. Now the onus is on Slab to prove that he didnt get it from crime, which even the most devout Sinn Fein supporter knows, he is NOT going to be able to do. Then Slab will be in the same category as all the other crims and druggies that have had their assets seized, where he belongs.Posted by on Mar 23, 2006 @ 11:29 PMMy apologies, Pete Baker, I did indeed misspell your name, but honestly not by deliberation (possibly inebriation) though I can see that the misspelling I typed might give rise to suspicion. Never mind - you can misspell me “Roary” next time to even up.
Oh, and by the way, upon what charge am I expected to answer to in court? Misspelling? I shall plead “Guilty, as charged while under the influence, your honour”. Usually a ten bob fine and dismissed in my day.
Posted by on Mar 24, 2006 @ 12:02 AM“Old Slab Murphy had a farm
Tiocfaidh oh ar la
And on that farm there was a barn”Elfinito thank you so much for being the bard and providing me with that hardy laugh!!!
Posted by on Mar 24, 2006 @ 01:14 AMI think people are forgetting here that Thomas Murphy had a legitimate oil business. Is it not possible that the cash and cheques was gained through a legitimate business and he just did’nt like using banks.
Posted by on Mar 24, 2006 @ 06:41 AM“Oh, and by the way, upon what charge am I expected to answer to in court?”
Steady there Rory, I didn’t wish you your day in court.. the reference was to Murphy’s [next] day in court.
Posted by on Mar 24, 2006 @ 08:28 AM“Old Slab Murphy had a farm
Tiocfaidh oh ar la
And on that farm there was a barn”“A Deisel nation once again”
“the oil behind the byre”
“oil stained bandage”
“the broad black deisel”
“four green (deisel) fields”
“only our deisel runs free”
“on the one road”
Any one got any morePosted by on Mar 24, 2006 @ 09:26 AMMick Hall
“Tom Murphy will be remembered in songs and history books when the minnows who now snap at his ankles are long forgotten. Good or bad let history judge.”You crack me up, you really do.
Think how funny you could be if you actually tried.Posted by on Mar 24, 2006 @ 10:04 AMOh, I see Pete, you trust that I hope that Mr Murphy also gets his day in court. Well, no actually. As I have said I do not believe that there will be credible evidence forthcoming to substantiate any charges. For even if Mr Murphy were a sum of all the things that are ascribed to him, he is certainly not stupid, and were he indeed a guerilla leader and criminal mastermind then he would seem to have been very clever in avoiding all charges for over thirty years. Why would he now leave evidence lying around that might incriminate him? It just doesn’t square.
Posted by on Mar 24, 2006 @ 10:11 AMSome other great people remembered and revered in song, clearly a great honour…
Stalin
Mao Tse Tung
Mussolini
Hitler
FrancoIm sure Tom wil be delighted, sure most of the money probably isn’t his anyway..he’s just letting it rest in his account for friends and he takes a small percentage.
Posted by on Mar 24, 2006 @ 10:22 AM
