A former JMSE director who the Tanaiste said gave her information about alleged payments to Mr Ray Burke was prevented from giving evidence yesterday following legal argument and testy exchanges at the tribunal.
Last week Tanaiste Ms Harney testified that Mr Gabriel Grehan had told her before the Cabinet was formed in 1997 that he understood Mr Burke had received £60,000 in payments of £30,000 from Mr James Gogarty, JMSE, and £30,000 from developer Mr Michael Bailey in June 1989.
Yesterday Mr Grehan was called, but before he gave any evidence there were arguments about whether his evidence was admissible and what statements he had made to the tribunal. The tribunal was told that Mr Grehan had made a statement of evidence on January 11th last but controversy then arose as to whether he had made a previous statement.
An objection was made by Mr Garrett Cooney SC, for the Murphy group, who said it seemed Mr Grehan made a statement of evidence to the tribunal on January 11th last which was circulated. They had had an opportunity of considering it and it was apparent that the basis of his proposed evidence was based on rumour and hearsay. The whole statement had phrases such as "I understand" and "my understanding is". Such evidence was therefore inadmissible, he said.
Mr John Gallagher SC, for the tribunal, said Mr Grehan was the former contracts manager and director of JMSE and was there in 1989 and stayed with the company until 1997. He was in a position to give evidence within his own knowledge of matters in 1989 and subsequently. His evidence was relevant and admissible.
Mr Grehan said in his statement that the information was based on conversations he had with others in JMSE and also based on rumour and hearsay. The question of a draft statement arose, Mr Gallagher said.
Mr Cooney asked why Mr Gallagher could not say that he was seeking other evidence from the witness.
Mr Gallagher said he had endeavoured to signal as clearly as he could that he would put what appeared to be a previous inconsistent statement to Mr Grehan.
Mr Cooney said as far as he was aware there was no prior written inconsistent statement emanating from Mr Grehan.
Mr Gallagher said he had said there was a prior draft statement. "I'm talking about a statement, and a version of events, that was given by Mr Grehan to two of my colleagues."
Mr Cooney asked if they intended to be witnesses in a case in which they were appearing as counsel. If that was the case, he would refer to the Code of Conduct of the Bar Council.
Mr Denis McCullough SC, for Mr Grehan, said his client was interviewed by members of the tribunal on two occasions. After the first meeting, he was given a statement prepared not by him but which was proffered to him and he was asked to adopt it as his statement. Mr Grehan felt it did not represent what he had been saying, and subsequently Mr Grehan's own statement was submitted.
The chairman said he would reserve his judgment, look at the matter carefully and endeavour to come to a fair and proper assessment.