Garda's naivety played part in false earnings claim, Tribunal told
A garda who was prosecuted for obtaining false loss of earning certificates for a witness in a prosecution against the McBreartys did not consider it a big sin when he did it, a solicitor said today.
Retired garda John Nicholson has admitted to passing on three or four false vouchers relating to Bernard Conlon, to ensure he gave evidence in a licensing case against the McBreartys in 1998.
In spring 2000, when he had been questioned by the Carty internal garda investigation team, he visited solicitor Kevin Kilrane to seek legal advice.
Today Mr Kilrane told the Morris Tribunal into garda corruption in Donegal that Mr Nicholson said he had been asked by the prosecution team in Donegal to resolve issues around Mr Conlon’s reluctance to give evidence.
Mr Conlon was refusing to come to court until he was paid his expenses, but was working in the black economy and so could not get a loss of earnings certificate from his employer, Mr Kilrane said.
“As part of the prosecution, Mr Conlon was a vital witness and had reached a stage he was starting not to co-operate.
“It was explained to Garda Nicholson he was an essential witness and could he please resolve whatever issues had to be resolved.”
The solicitor said Mr Nicholson gave the impression he had obtained a certificate from another garda, but had not mentioned any names.
Mr Kilrane described Mr Nicholson as a decent and honest man who indicated a degree of naivety, which might allow him to be manipulated.
But despite being investigated by the Carty team for the false claims, the garda did not blame anyone else during the meeting with the solicitor and was prepared to resign, Mr Kilrane said.
“He considered it, I think, rather surprisingly, rather an innocent matter that in some way had developed an enormous significance that he didn’t remotely foresee at the time.
“I don’t think at the time of the procurement of the voucher he considered it anything more than a bureaucratic administrative little matter that had to be dealt with.
“John Nicholson appeared to think that he was being asked to resolve little more than a niggling administrative problem.”
Asked by Desmond Dockery, counsel for Mr Conlon, if Mr Nicholson gave the impression that it was a relatively common-place practice to procure forgeries, Mr Kilrane said he wouldn’t go that far.
But he said: “To the extent that he didn’t consider it any form of big sin when it happened, one can draw whatever conclusion one can draw from that.
“John Nicholson was utterly surprised that this emerged at all,” he added.
It was only later the garda understood the gravity of what he had done, Mr Kilrane said.
