Three days of confusing and contradictory evidence from the man who told the Tanaiste that Mr Ray Burke had been paid £30,000 have only deepened the mystery of the circumstances in which the Taoiseach appointed Mr Burke to the Cabinet in 1997.
Ms Harney has given evidence that Mr Gay Grehan phoned her in mid-1997 to confirm the rumours then circulating about bribes concerning a politician and to identify Mr Burke as the man concerned.
Mr Grehan this week maintains he phoned the Tanaiste effectively to scotch the bribery rumours. Yes, Mr Burke got £30,000 from Joseph Murphy Structural Engineering; no, it was not paid for planning favours. But even Mr Grehan's own lawyer was forced yesterday to concede that his client's answers had not been "entirely consistent." Mr Denis McCullough SC attributed this to Mr Grehan's limited direct knowledge. However, this was before the witness made his biggest gaffe, one that stemmed directly from new evidence introduced by his own legal team.
Mr McCullough invited his client to dispute the evidence of Mr Garvan McGinley, the former general secretary of the Progressive Democrats, that he had a second phone conversation with Mr Grehan on or about June 22nd or 23rd, 1997.
It was a minor enough point, but to prove it Mr McCullough revealed that Mr Grehan was out of the State between June 17th and 25th, attending a conference in England. Mr Grehan said he did not recall speaking by phone to Mr McGinley or the Tanaiste while he was away.
The problem for the witness is that he has already told the tribunal that he knew in advance that Mr Dermot Ahern of Fianna Fail was going to London to interview Mr Joseph Murphy jnr about the Burke allegations.
This took place on Tuesday, June 24th 1997. Mr Grehan said he was told this by JMSE's chief executive, Mr Frank Reynolds.
But as the tribunal lawyers quickly asked, how could Mr Reynolds have told Mr Grehan this if he was out of the State. The Taoiseach asked Mr Ahern to interview Mr Murphy only on June 21st.
Mr Grehan admitted he could not reconcile the discrepancies.
Right to the end, the witness vacillated. On Wednesday he told the tribunal that he learned of the Burke payment in late 1996. Yesterday he agreed with Mr Michael Cush SC, for the Murphy group, that he was mistaken in this and that he learned of it only in 1997.
By the afternoon, though, he was agreeing with Mr John Gallagher SC, for the tribunal, that, yes, he did know back in 1996.
He told lawyers for Mr James Gogarty that it was "merely coincidence" that he left JMSE just as the tribunal was starting. There was "nothing unresolved" between him and the company.
He has agreed to allow the tribunal to examine his severance package, which was paid in full one month after he first gave evidence last May.