Judge 'tried to blame secretary for error in deception case', court told
A District Court judge accused of attempting to deceive her friend out of half his estate initially claimed it was a mistake by her secretary, a court has heard.
Heather Perrin (aged 60) is accused of tricking Thomas Davis into bequeathing half his €1m estate to her two children while he was a client of her solicitors firm.
The trial heard that when the alleged deception came to light, Ms Perrin claimed on the phone to the alleged victim’s niece that her secretary must have made an error.
There was also evidence that the judge later claimed the mistake was on the part of Mr Davis and his wife and that she had drawn up the will in line with their wishes at the time.
Ms Perrin of Lambay Court, Malahide has pleaded not guilty at Dublin Circuit Criminal Court to deceptively inducing Mr Davis to bequeath half of his estate to Sybil and Adam Perrin at her office on Fairview Strand on January 22, 2009.
She was made a judge in February 2009 after running a solicitors practise in Fairview of which Mr Davis was a long-standing client.
The trial has previously heard testimony from Mr Davis, who is in his eighties, that he wished to leave the vast majority of his estate to his two nieces who live in England. He said he only intended to leave €2000 each to the Perrin children.
Prosecuting counsel Dominic McGinn SC earlier said there would be evidence that Ms Perrin told gardaí that Mr Davis instructed her to split the estate between her children and his nieces because he was unhappy with how the nieces had “squandered” cash gifts from him in the past.
Today the jury heard from Mr Davis’s two nieces who agreed they had been given Stg£40,000 by their uncle over the years but that they had used it to pay off a mortgage and buy a new boiler.
They said the rest of the money was still in a saving account and their aunt and uncle were happy with how they had used it.
Mr Davis’s niece Alison Rowley told Mr McGinn: “I don’t call paying off a mortgage squandering money.”
She said they never asked Mr Davis for money and that it was given “with a good heart.” She said she never needed money because of employment difficulties and added that she is a senior manager in a car company and drives two luxury vehicles.
Another niece, Michelle Checklin, said she had given most of the Stg£40,000 given to them to Ms Rowley so she could pay off her mortgage. Ms Checklin said she had already paid off her mortgage and only used less than Stg£3000 of the gift to buy a new boiler and gas fire.
Ms Checklin gave evidence that her uncle was “absolutely astonished” when he found out Ms Perrin’s children were among the main beneficiaries of his will.
She said the next day when she spoke to Ms Perrin on the phone, the judge asked her if there was a problem.
Ms Checklin replied: “Yes, because you put your children in my uncle and aunty’s will.”
She said Ms Perrin responded that it must have been her secretary’s mistake and that she will sort it out. Ms Checklin said it was already being sorted out and ended the conversation.
Joan Darling gave evidence that after the alleged deception came to light, she acted as an intermediary between the Perrins and the Davises because she was good friends with both parties.
She told the prosecution that the accused’s husband, Albert Perrin, asked her to approach the Davises and see if they would agree to talk. She said Mr Davis refused and said it wouldn’t be appropriate.
Ms Darling added that Mr Perrin had told her that the accused made the will in line with the Davis’s wishes and that they were mistaken about their instructions at the time.
The trial continues before Judge Mary Ellen Ring and a jury.
