The Court of Appeal has dismissed John Cornelius Murphy’s appeal against four theft convictions involving cheques totalling €18,643 from Children To Lapland Appeal Limited, a charity that organised trips to Lapland for sick and terminally ill children.
Murphy was convicted after a two-day trial on 3 March 2016 and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment, suspended on terms. The Court of Appeal judgment, delivered by Kennedy J. on 1 March 2019, records that the four cheques were drawn in June and July 2010 and lodged to Murphy’s personal account.
The prosecution alleged Murphy, a director of the charity, wrote and signed the cheques and deposited them into his account. At trial, he accepted that he lodged them but argued he believed he was entitled to do so. The defence said the charity, Murphy and his travel business, Manor Castle Limited trading as United Travel, had funded or subsidised one another. Evidence included that Murphy’s personal account was sometimes used to pay Manor Castle wages and expenses. A bookkeeper for the travel business said he had never lodged company cheques into Murphy’s personal account.
The central appeal issue was whether the trial judge had wrongly prevented the jury from considering an honest-belief defence. The Court of Appeal said the evidence supporting such a belief was “very thin indeed” and insufficient to require the issue to be left to the jury. It also said the trial judge repeatedly made clear that assessing the evidence was the jury’s task, including in the closing direction that the jury should acquit if in reasonable doubt about whether Murphy believed he was entitled to the money.
The court rejected the argument that the judge should have recharged the jury on honest belief, finding the issue had already been addressed. It also found no error in the judge’s comments about bank documents relating to a later €4,000 transfer from Murphy’s account to the charity. That transfer took place in November 2010, after the four transactions in the charges.
The final appeal ground concerned the trial judge’s refusal to direct acquittals at the close of the prosecution case. The Court of Appeal said the issue was properly for the jury. It dismissed the appeal, leaving the convictions and sentence in place.