Solicitor accused of stealing €400 insisted he returned the money to client, trial hears

By Eimear Dodd

A solicitor accused of the theft of €400 insisted to gardai during a voluntary interview that he had returned this money to his client.

Cahir O’Higgins (49) has pleaded not guilty to one count of the theft of €400 in July 2016 and four counts of attempting to pervert the course of justice in December 2017.

Mr O’Higgins, of Cahir O’Higgins and Company, Kingsbride House, Parkgate Street, Dublin, denies the allegations against him.

The court has heard that Mr O’Higgins is a criminal defence solicitor with over 20 years’ experience.

It is the State’s case that Mr O’Higgins was standing in for a colleague to represent Raul Sanz Quilis, a Spanish national, who was before the District Court on July 30, 2016 on a charge of criminal damage.

The judge said the case would be struck out if a payment of €200 was made and Mr O’Higgins then volunteered to use Mr Sanz’s bank card to withdraw the money.

The prosecution alleges Mr O’Higgins made three withdrawals totalling €600 from the ATM and allegedly placed €400 into his pocket.

€200 was paid to the court and the case against Mr Sanz was then struck out.

It is further alleged that Mr O’Higgins provided gardaí in December 2017 with a copy of notes he claimed to have made on July 30, 2016.

The prosecution say that Mr O’Higgins was aware these notes contained untrue information, and that they were not made on July 30, 2016.

Continuing his evidence yesterday, Detective Garda Colm Kelly said he met Mr O’Higgins at the Bridewell Garda Station on December 17, 2017.

The defendant handed over his handwritten notes relating to Mr Sanz Quilis.

The jury has previously heard that Mr O’Higgins emailed two pages of these notes to Det Gda Kelly on December 8, 2017.

Mr O’Higgins was also interviewed on a voluntary basis on December 17, 2017.

He told gardai that he was asked by solicitor Tracy Horan to attend district court on July 30, 2016 “as a favour to her”.

He said he spoke to Mr Sanz Quilis before court and gave him advice about the case. Mr Sanz Quilis indicated that he wanted to plead guilty.

He said he had a short consultation with Mr Sanz Quilis but couldn’t recall if it was over the phone or in person.

Mr O’Higgins said that his view was that Judge John Coughlan may make an order of compensation and got permission to use his bank card “in anticipation of that type of order”.

He said Mr Sanz Quilis consented to the withdrawal of €600 from his account and there was “no doubt in my mind that I had his full permission to use his card”.

During the interview, Mr O’Higgins was asked why he withdrew €600.

He replied this was the maximum and he “wanted enough cash to arm” himself in case that the judge may change the order and direct compensation or a donation to charity above €200.

Mr O’Higgins said he put €400 and the charge sheets in an envelope and handed it to Mr Sanz Quilis after the case was struck out.

Mr O’Higgins said he was “absolutely sure” he didn’t retain any of Mr Sanz Quilis’ property.

Mr O’Higgins said he finished writing up his notes later that evening and dropped copies into the office of Darcy Horan solicitors.

He said he suggested they ring Mr Sanz Quilis.

“If I’d taken this man short or stolen from him, I wouldn’t have encouraged [his] solicitors to debrief him,” Mr O’Higgins said.

He noted that Judge Coughlan was going to assign legal aid to him, but he stopped this.

“If I was greedy or trying to garner advantage, I could have let judge assign legal aid to me. Or I could have said no legal aid and garnered cash from Mr Sanz Quilis under the pretext of legal fees”.

Mr O’Higgins said he told his client had no legal fees were payable outside the court.

He said he was able to communicate with Mr Sanz Quilis using a mixture of English, Spanish and French, but agreed that “in hindsight” it would have been better to use an interpreter.

Mr O’Higgins said he had no recollection that an interpreter was present in court or that he was offered the assistance of one outside court.

Gda Tao Yu gave evidence earlier in the trial that he saw an interpreter leaving the courtroom and pointed this out to Mr O’Higgins.

Mr O’Higgins told gardai that he was “sure” he returned the €400 to Mr Sanz Quilis. “The only thing I’m sure of is that I gave him his property”.

He said his notes were “incorrect” at points and were “thrown together without the remotest thought they would be looked at by me again or gardai”.

He became aware in October 2016 that the Spanish Embassy had made a complaint and that the Law Society and gardai might want to speak with him.

Mr O’Higgins said he wrote up some notes around October 2016 “in anticipation of shit hitting the fan with the Law Society”.

He continued it was “not smart” to send these notes onto gardai, later saying his primary concern was an investigation by the Law Society.

Mr O’Higgins then told gardai that he only spoke to Mr Sanz Quilis once and had “bugger all memory” of it but knew he “didn’t outline anything”.

He told gardai it was “wrong” to suggest his notes were “contemporaneous”. “I should not have embarked on an arse-covering exercise”, Mr O’Higgins said. Later, he told gardai it was a “grave error of judgement” to provide them with “bullshit notes”.

He said he was “trying to be clever” and to insulate himself from any allegation about how he dealt with the case.

He acknowledged he handed gardai notes made “well after event that weren’t correct” and had represented a client without instructions.

He added that he “wanted to try to make the situation look less appalling”.

Mr O’Higgins told gardai he had “no consent” to withdraw €600 but did it on the assumption that the situation could change and that he had “implied permission”.

He said he had 20 years experience “without an allegation of dishonesty” and wouldn’t risk his practice for €400. “I came in worried about a Law Society complaint but now I’m worried about a theft charge”.

“I regret not being frank at the outset….I feel if I just came out and told the truth I would have been believed that I returned his man’s money to him”.

The jury heard that Mr O’Higgins was interviewed voluntarily for a second time on March 20, 2018 when he provided a pre-prepared statement.

In the statement, Mr O”Higgins said he doesn’t believe he spoke to Mr Sanz Quilis before court but can’t recall.

Mr O’Higgins said he was “alarmed” after Gda Yu told him he intended to raise the issue of compensation if possible as it wasn’t unusual for Judge Coughlan to change an order.

He said he “deemed it was appropriate and responsible” to plan for this and made three withdrawals totalling €600 from the ATM.

Mr O’Higgins said he “hoped” the judge would “settle on” €200 but had €400 “as contingency”. He said he hadn’t sought consent but “inferred” it in the circumstances, adding that he was “custodian” of the money until it was paid to the court or returned to Mr Sanz Quilis.

He said he placed €400 into an envelope and gave it to his client either in the dock or the grand hall of the CCJ.

Mr O’Higgins suggested there could have been a “misunderstanding” or that Mr Sanz Quilis “didn’t realise” money had been returned to him.

When interviewed, Mr O’Higgins asked gardai to speak to other individuals who may have been in the courtoom at the time.

He also asked them to check any CCTV from the courtroom.

The court heard that Mr O’Higgins also provided several statements to gardai, which were sent to the Director of Public Prosecutions along with the investigation file.

Det Gda Kelly gave evidence that there are no CCTV cameras inside a courtroom for security reasons.

He said gardai contacted the interpreter who was present on July 30, 2016, but they declined to give a statement.

He agreed with Michael O’Higgins SC, defending, during cross-examination that his client was under the impression that there were CCTV cameras in the courtroom.

Defence counsel suggested that the investigation didn’t follow up his client’s contention that Gda Yu saw him hand something to Mr Sanz Quilis.

The witness said he spoke to Gda Yu who indicated he had nothing to add to his statement.

Det Gda Kelly expressed the view that he could ask questions to remove ambiguity, but not leading questions.

Counsel asked Det Gda Kelly if he followed up on statements provided to him by Mr O’Higgins.

He said he didn’t, noting that he accepted a statement as coming from a named individual as it was signed.

Mr O’Higgins SC suggested that CCTV footage from the entrance hall of CCJ shows Mr Sanz Quilis putting something into his pocket. Det Gda Kelly said he couldn’t see this in the CCTV.

Mr O’Higgins has pleaded not guilty to the theft of €400 on July 30, 2016 at Londis shop, on Parkgate Street.

He also pleaded not guilty to four counts of perverting the course of public justice contrary to common law, on December 8 and December 17, 2017, within the State and at the Bridewell Garda Station in Dublin.

The prosecution case closed this afternoon. The trial continues before Judge Martin Nolan and a jury.