One of the country’s top criminal defence solicitors has been convicted of the theft of €400 and four counts of attempting to pervert the course of justice.
Cahir O’Higgins (49) had 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 by providing notes to gardaí which he knew contained incorrect information.
O’Higgins, of Cahir O’Higgins and Company, Kingsbride House, Parkgate Street, Dublin, denied the allegations against him. The court has heard that O’Higgins is a criminal defence solicitor with over 20 years’ experience.
On Friday the jury returned unanimous verdicts of guilty on all five counts after just under five hours of deliberations.
O’Higgins made no reaction as the verdicts were delivered.
Judge Martin Nolan thanked the jury for their attention and work during the case.
Remanding O’Higgins in custody, Judge Nolan adjourned the case to November 25th next for sentence.
The trial heard evidence relating to a District Court sitting on July 30th, 2016.
Spanish national Raul Sanz Quilis was before Dublin District Court having admitted criminal damage in relation to a fire in a toilet cubicle in Dicey’s Bar.
Judge John Coughlan indicated that if Mr Sanz Quilis paid €200 to the Court Poor Box, the case would be struck out.
The judge made his decision after hearing evidence of arrest, charge and caution from Garda Tao Yu and that the accused man, who was in custody, was pleading guilty.
No representative from the solicitors assigned to Mr Sanz Quilis under the legal aid scheme was present in court. Instead, arrangements were made for O’Higgins to stand in and represent him.
Gardaí obtained Mr Sanz Quilis’s bank card and PIN, then gave them to O’Higgins who’d volunteered to go to an ATM.
O’Higgins went to the Londis on Parkgate Street where CCTV showed him withdraw cash, then place it in a piece of paper.
O’Higgins made two further withdrawals and put these into his trousers pocket, before making a further attempt to use the ATM.
Evidence was heard that three cash withdrawals totalling €600 were made from Mr Sanz Quilis’s bank account.
When O’Higgins returned to court, €200 was paid and the case struck out, meaning Mr Sanz Quilis was left without a conviction.
Giving evidence via video-link, Mr Sanz Quilis said he only consented to money being withdrawn to pay the €200 fine.
O’Higgins was invited on December 8th, 2017 to attend a voluntary interview about the theft allegation. O’Higgins later emailed Det Gda Colm Kelly, attaching two photos of handwritten notes.
These notes – dated July 30th, 2016 – outlined O’Higgins apparent interactions with Mr Sanz Quilis. O’Higgins gave the originals to gardaí when he was interviewed on December 17th, 2018.
As his view was that the judge may order compensation, O’Higgins said he got permission to use Mr Sanz Quilis’s bank card and consent to withdraw €600.
O’Higgins said he handed an envelope containing €400 and the charge sheets to Mr Sanz Quilis after the case was struck out.
He finished writing up his notes that evening and later dropped copies into the office of the assigned solicitors.
Later in the interview, O’Higgins admitted he became aware of a complaint by the Spanish Embassy and said he wrote the notes around October 2016 “in anticipation of shit hitting the fan with the Law Society”.
He said his main concern was a potential Law Society investigation. Later, he told gardaí it was a “grave error of judgment” to provide them with “bullshit notes”.
He said he had 20 years experience “without an allegation of dishonesty” and wouldn’t risk his practice for €400.
Closing the prosecution’s case, Eoin Lawlor SC suggested Mr Sanz Quilis was “uniquely vulnerable” to this theft, due to his prior intoxication, poor English, and as he’d “got off lightly”.
He told the jury that the perverting the course of justice charges arise from O’Higgins’s actions after he became aware of the theft allegation.
Mr Lawlor suggested O’Higgins “lied” in and about these notes, which were intended as a defence against a theft allegation.
In his speech, senior defence counsel Michael O’Higgins said that “it’s not possible to be satisfied beyond doubt what happened here” and the “correct verdict is not guilty”.
