Jury hears closing speeches from legal teams

It has been suggested to a jury in a trial relating to an alleged conspiracy that a former financial services manager was an “integral part” of a scheme to defraud investors in Custom House Capital over a decade ago.

Ciara Kelleher (51) of Blackhorse Ave, Dublin 7, has pleaded not guilty to one count of conspiring with others to defraud investors, clients, and customers of Custom House Capital (CHC) Ltd. by intentionally misleading them as to where or how their assets had been placed in the investment firm.

The offences are alleged to have happened within the State on dates between October 2008 and July 2011.

Lorcan Staines SC, prosecuting, told the jury yesterday in his closing speech that Ms Kelleher worked for a company with property investments in Ireland and Europe during the crash.

He said Ms Kelleher told gardai in interviews that she thought everything was “as good as gold” in CHC between 2008 and 2011.

Mr Staines said it is hard to understand how someone who worked in a financial institution at the level Ms Kelleher did could have thought this at a time when “Ireland Inc. was at risk of collapsing”.

He said it is the prosecution’s case that Ms Kelleher knew clients were getting incorrect information about the location of their money.

He said that while all participants in the scheme to mislead investors are equally guilty, they didn’t have the same level of responsibility.

Mr Staines said it is accepted that Ms Kelleher was a salaried employee of CHC, not a shareholder like Harry Cassidy, CHC’s CEO or John Mulholland, a non-executive director.

Prosecuting counsel said Ms Kelleher was an “integral part” of the scheme, which deprived CHC clients of the truth and had “real consequences for the people involved”.

He told the jury they must place any sympathy they may have for investors in CHC or Ms Kelleher to one side when deliberating.

Mr Staines said an email chain from October 2010 suggests Ms Kelleher was made aware that CHC “can’t afford more trouble” with the regulator.

However, she told gardai that she didn’t know about these issues until 2011.

Mr Staines said it is accepted that a huge amount of clients’ money was misappropriated, and a large number of clients were affected.

He submitted to the jury that the emails are the “best way” to assess the case as they make it clear who was involved in the scheme and are not subject to revisions due to the passage of time.

Mr Staines said Ms Kelleher made “excuse after excuse” trying to explain statements within the emails.

He said Ms Kelleher explained the backing out process to gardai, but not why this was reversed once the valuation had been run.

Prosecuting counsel noted that other CHC employees gave evidence they had concerns about this process, but Ms Kelleher didn’t seem to have had similar concerns.

Prosecuting counsel said Ms Kelleher had “enormous knowledge” about the company’s procedures and practices.

Mr Staines said the issue of whether or not Ms Kelleher went to the Central Bank on July 11, 2011, is a “red herring” and irrelevant.

Michael Bowman SC, defending, told the jury that they must keep the presumption of innocence at the front of their minds when assessing the circumstantial evidence in this case.

He told the jury that they must be satisfied that there isn’t an “innocent explanation” for every step of the prosecution’s case.

The emails are like a “jigsaw”, and different perspectives are possible based on how they are reviewed, defence counsel suggested.

Mr Bowman told the jury that there are many strands of evidence that allow them to infer that Ms Kelleher went to the Central Bank on July 11, 2011, with Brian Cahalin.

Mr Bowman said he read through Ms Kelleher’s interviews during the cross-examination of gardai to check if they followed up on what she told them.

“The prosecution can’t say she [Ms Kelleher] told one lie” during interview in 2020, Mr Bowman said.

The trial continues before Judge Orla Crowe and the jury.