Businessman found guilty of possessing stolen tools

A CARLOW businessman has been convicted of being in possession of an assortment of stolen power tools and providing five false invoices to the gardaí in order to prove ownership of the tools. Charles Dunne of Ace Fencing Ltd was also found guilty of attempting to pervert the course of justice following a two-week trial at Carlow Circuit Criminal Court.

Mr Dunne (48) of Rathmore, Tullow pleaded not guilty at Carlow Circuit Criminal Court to having a large assortment of power tools in such circumstances that it is reasonable to conclude that he knew that the property was stolen or was reckless as to whether it was stolen on 13 January 2019. He further pleaded not guilty that he did without lawful authority or excuse possess stolen property, a large assortment of tools and power tools in such circumstances that it is reasonable to conclude that he knew or was reckless as to whether it was stolen on the same date.

The jury were told that these two counts, a charge of handling stolen property and a charge of being in possession of stolen property, are considered alternative counts.

Mr Dunne also pleaded not guilty to 20 charges of using a false instrument at Carlow Garda Station on dates between January and February 2019, in that he provided fraudulent invoices, which was and which he believed to be a false instrument with the intention of inducing another person to accept it as genuine and by reason of so accepting the said instrument to do some act or to make some omission or to provide some service to the prejudice of that person or any other person.

Finally, Mr Dunne pleaded not guilty to attempting to pervert the course of justice at Carlow Garda Station between January 2019 and February 2019 by providing false documents in a deliberate attempt to obstruct a Garda criminal investigation, to obstruct the administration of justice or to pervert the course of justice.

Judge Sinéad McMullan told the jurors before they began their deliberations on Thursday that five charges had been removed from their consideration and they should record these counts as ‘not guilty by direction of the trial judge’ in the issue paper. The charges that were removed related to charges of using a false instrument at Carlow Garda Station, meaning that the jury had to consider if 15 invoices were fraudulent.

Following almost six hours of deliberation, the jury returned guilty verdicts in relation to the possession charge, five charges of using a false instrument and the charge of attempting to pervert the course of justice. The jury acquitted Mr Dunne on all other charges.

Judge Sinéad McMullan thanked the jurors for their service. She remanded Mr Dunne on continuing bail until the next sittings of Carlow Circuit Criminal Court in November, when a date will be set for a full sentence hearing.

Niall Storan BL, prosecuting, initially asked for Mr Dunne to surrender his passport, but that application was withdrawn to allow Mr Dunne to go on a family holiday. He must then surrender his passport on his return. He was also directed to sign on once a week at Carlow Garda Station.

Detective Sergeant Brian Sheeran told Vincent Heneghan SC, prosecuting, during the trial that gardaí were in receipt of confidential information in relation to the presence of stolen property at Mr Dunne’s yard in Tullow in January 2019. A warrant was secured and Det Sgt Sheeran said he was present when the yard was searched. He described seeing a large number of tools in pallets in a number of different sheds.

He said the items were seized and photographed. An inventory was later compiled of all the suspected stolen tools.

Det Sgt Sheeran told the jury that Mr Dunne later provided about 60 invoices to gardaí in relation to the tools that had been seized from Rathmore. This was to support a police property application by Dunne to have the suspected stolen tools returned to him. It was the state’s case that these invoices were fraudulent.

Vincent Heneghan SC, prosecuting, told the jury in his closing address that when they examined the legitimate invoices against those supplied by Mr Dunne, in the course of their deliberations, they were entitled to “draw an inference” as to what purpose Dunne may have had for altering those invoices. He warned the jurors that they were not entitled to speculate and, if they needed to speculate, that meant the prosecution had not proved the case beyond a reasonable doubt.

He said it was the state’s case that the invoices were altered and “we say you can infer that it was done for a purpose, and we say it was done to prove ownership of the tools and to get the tools back. We say that they were altered or fabricated for that purpose”.

Mr Heneghan reminded the jury that the state was not suggesting that Mr Dunne stole the tools himself but, he said, despite that he asked the jury to remember that the theft of such tools was not a victimless crime.

He asked them to imagine a young apprenticeship landscaper just setting up a business. He has saved up money to purchase the tools and organise a van and he works hard. He parks up his van somewhere and, when he returns, his tools are gone.

“Tools are not cheap,” Mr Heneghan said. “He may have jobs lined up – there is his income gone, work gone for the week. He has to borrow money to replace his tools.

“There is no suggestion that Mr Dunne stole the tools. He is charged with possession and handling, but there are real people behind those tools, real people who earn their livelihoods from these tools.” 

Paul Comiskey O’Keeffe BL, defending, told the jury in his closing speech that his client was that apprentice that Mr Heneghan referred to in his closing speech. He said Dunne was a hard worker and that people had arrived at his yard “on receipt of confidential information and that all of his tools are removed”.

Counsel suggested to the jury that his client used “legitimate legal means and processes to get those tools back”.

Mr Comiskey O’Keeffe said this was “not a hypothetical story but a real” situation for Mr Dunne. “He needed to get his men back to work and he needed to get his tools. He had obligations to clients.” 

The defence counsel said the gardaí took all his client’s tools and he suggested to the jury that it was “nonsense” to suggest that all of these tools were stolen, that the state was suggesting his client did not go to shops or auctions to buy the tools – “they are all hot”.

Mr Comiskey O’Keeffe suggested to the jury that “only an idiot would then go fabricating invoices … when the alternative is to say nothing. When you are in trouble, put the shovel down and stop digging”.

He said his client looked to get the tools back “because they mean that much to him”.