A former Bank of Ireland employee who was fired for sending “pornographic” e-mails from a work computer did so to convince people he was not gay, the Employment Appeals Tribunal heard today.
James Reilly was a senior member of staff at the bank's Blanchardstown branch in Dublin when he was fired in 2009 along with two fellow employees for what the bank decided was inappropriate behaviour.
Mr Reilly has brought the case before the tribunal citing unfair dismissal claiming that the bank did not follow proper procedure.
While Mr Reilly has admitted to sending the e-mails, he has said that he did so without reading them and was therefore unaware of the exact content, which included images of naked children.
Giving evidence to the tribunal today, Patrick Lonergan - the Bank of Ireland branch manager who carried out the investigation into the e-mails - described a meeting he had with Mr Reilly about the issue in March of 2009.
He recalled that Mr Reilly was very emotional in that meeting and that he had described himself as a being known to be a "ladies man in the area" and that forwarding on the e-mails was a way of hiding his homosexuality.
Mr Lonergan described the images sent via e-mail as “pornographic”, “indecent”, “obscene”, “rude” and “generally distasteful”. He said he came to his decision "by taking a common sense approach - how would a reasonable person regard them."
He went on to say that he had rejected Mr Reilly's claims to not have read the e-mails themselves but to merely have forwarded them on.
"I found it strange. I have never sent on an e-mail without reading it. You are unlikely to receive a letter in the post and send it on to someone without opening it" he said.
The bank's other witness on the day, Brian Leahy, a member of Bank of Ireland's information technology security team, also stated his belief that Mr Reilly had known what was in the e-mails.
He revealed to the tribunal that in one forwarded e-mail; Mr Reilly had changed to subject title from 'what really happens at weight watchers' meetings' to 'Ian in his first brothel' before forwarding it on to two junior colleagues in the bank.
"The subject would have to refer to the content" said Mr Leady adding that this would suggest that Mr Reilly had indeed known what was in the e-mail; otherwise he would not have had any motivation for changing its title.
Mr Leahy, who has been a Bank of Ireland employee for 31 years, said that the e-mails sent by Mr Reilly were "among the most unsettling that I have ever seen."
The hearing was adjourned prior to Mr Lonergan's cross examination and is due to resume in mid-November.