GERRY ‘The Monk’ Hutch faces a legal bill of hundreds of thousands of euro after the Special Criminal Court ruled he must pay his own Regency murder trial defence costs.
And asked by The Irish Sun if half a million euro was an accurate estimate of the sum involved, a source close to the case replied: “At least.”
Clik here to view.
Clik here to view.
Clik here to view.
In April, the 60-year-old was acquitted of the murder of Kinahan cartel thug David Byrne at the Regency Hotel in February 2016 after the court found State witness Jonathan Dowdall’s evidence to be “wholly unreliable”.
Gerry Hutch wanted the taxpayer to pay for his defence because he was found not guilty.
But in a judgement today, presiding Judge Tara Burns said the State was totally justified in prosecuting him for Byrne’s murder.
She said audio tapes played to the court clearly revealed him to be the man in charge of three AK47s which he knew had been used in the murder in the weeks afterwards.
She said this was evidence of “serious, criminal conduct”.
She said the Special Criminal Court had ruled that the Hutch Organised Crime Group carried out the gun attack and Gerry Hutch was the “figurehead” or “patriarchal figure” of the group in which it was a reasonable possibility “nothing happens without his say so”.
But none of this made up the case the Prosecution made against him at trial — that he was one of the gunmen at the hotel.
She said that contention was founded on the claims of Jonathan Dowdall and there was no independent evidence to support them.
However, she said this didn’t mean his prosecution was in any way unfair and so she rejected the application.
Hutch wasn’t in court for the ruling and it’s understood he flew to Spain a number of weeks after the not guilty verdict in April.
The case against him revolved around the evidence of State witness Dowdall, who was originally also charged with Byrne’s murder.
However the charge against Dowdall was dropped days before the trial was due to begin last October and he pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of facilitating Byrne’s murder by booking a room in the Regency the night before the attack.
This room was ultimately used by one of the gunmen, Kevin ‘Flat Cap’ Murray, who has since passed away.
Dowdall was jailed for four years, while his father Patrick Dowdall, who admitted the same offence, received a two-year sentence.
The former Sinn Fein councillor’s appeal against the severity of that sentence will be heard on June 20 and, after today’s ruling, the court agreed to hand over the transcript from the April 17 verdict to his lawyers as it makes a number of references to Dowdall.
Earlier today Brendan Grehan SC, for Hutch, opened his submissions by arguing that his client had been acquitted of the sole charge against him.
Counsel said the court was only given Dowdall’s statement on the eve of the trial but despite this the Monk was anxious to proceed because otherwise it could be another year before it was heard.
Mr Grehan said: “The result was that the evidence of Mr Dowdall could be effectively back-loaded. This resulted in a very lengthy cross-examination. I can’t apologise for that because it was necessary so we could expose his true nature and character and ultimately Mr Hutch was found not guilty.”
Counsel said it’s “up to the court to exercise their discretion” but he believed “the result of the prosecution is the ultimate thing to consider when dealing with cost”.
He added: “The initial decision to prosecute on the strength of the audio was a wrong decision, which was seen from the ruling of this court. It would be unfair Mr Hutch would be denied the substantial cost of defending him.”
Mr Grehan added that the Monk was arrested in Spain on August 12, 2021 and the Spanish court delivered its extradition judgement on September 14 before he was sent back to Ireland on September 29, meaning the court proceedings were not unduly held up.
He pointed to the prosecution’s assertion that Hutch associated with participants in the Regency attack, but countered: “You can choose your friends but your family is your family.”
He also said Hutch was denied the opportunity to pursue an application to dismiss the case on the weakness of the audio evidence against him because he was brought before the Special Criminal Court.
Mr Grehan said: “In our submission, the prosecution was never warranted on the audio in the context that there was a multitude of matters which could swing both ways, in terms of knowledge or what he (Hutch) knew of the event. There is nothing in 10 hours of conversation that pointed to any involvement.
“What was the prosecution ever going to be until Mr Dowdall came along? Instead of strengthening their case, you could say that in fact the opposite happened. Mr Dowdall played his hand in terms of applying the maximum pressure on the prosecution by making his statement on the eve of the trial.
“It does seem extraordinary that the proper due diligence did not occur on Mr Dowdall until after the prosecution had committed to calling him as a witness.”
In response prosecutor Sean Gillane accepted that every person who comes before the court is entitled to the presumption of innocence, but he said it was wrong to say Hutch had been totally vindicated by the court’s ruling.
He said: “It is not unfair to remind the court of some of the findings in relation to Mr Hutch.
Mr Hutch’s presumption of innocence has been vindicated but the court’s verdict does not amount to an approbation of his conduct.”
Mr Gillane said he took full responsibility for decisions made “in terms of the carriage of this case” but insisted it was not unfair for Hutch to have to pay his costs.
Counsel explained: “The investigation involved a number of agencies, including agencies abroad. It involved the collection of hours of CCTV footage. It was a prosecution of five people which has resulted in four convictions, whether by pleas of guilty or the findings of this court, so on that basis the prosecution was absolutely warranted. I respectfully submit that the discretion of the court should not be awarded in Mr Hutch’s favour and he should not be awarded his costs.”
Clik here to view.
Clik here to view.
