Man charged with facilitation of organised crime in Drogheda
Matthew Mooney, with an address in Moneymore, Drogheda, was brought before Dundalk District Court this afternoon.
He is charged with seven offences under Section 73 of the Criminal Justice Act, which allege he committed a serious offence for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with, a criminal organisation.
Mr Mooney is also further charged with allegedly possessing an article, namely a mobile phone, for the commissioning of a drug trafficking offence.
All of the offences are alleged to have occurred in Drogheda between December 2023 and February 2024.
Court Presenter Garda Sergeant Laura Blanche gave evidence that arrest, charge and caution had been made by way of schedule.
An application for bail could not be made for the alleged Section 73 offences as this can only be granted by the High Court.
Judge Stephanie Coggans remanded the accused in custody to appear before the same court again via video-link this day next week.
The judge also granted an application for legal aid after one was made by Pearse Collins BL during this afternoon's brief hearing.
The Drogheda feud, which erupted in 2018, saw two gangs battle for control of the drugs trade in the town.
There were multiple shootings and four people were killed, including teenager Keane Mulready-Woods.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sunday World
11 hours ago
- Sunday World
US-based Irish businessman takes legal challenge against nearly 90 revenue and forgery offences
Illann Power filed for bankruptcy in Florida in 2022. An entrepreneur awaiting trial accused of almost 90 revenue, forgery and reckless filing of company information offences has initiated a legal challenge against his prosecution. The High Court lawsuit was filed this week by Illann Power, a Carlow businessman based in the US. Mr Power is a founder of spirits company Incubrands, which was acquired by Bacardi in 2015. He also co-created Nohovation, a start-up venture fund, and investment firm Illann Power Companies. In the judicial review proceedings, he is seeking orders restraining the DPP from continuing the prosecution and halting civil and criminal investigations related to the prosecution. The 33-year-old is also seeking orders staying administrative and judicial determinations arising from those investigations, including assessments of income tax. Businessman Illann Power. Photo: Paddy Cummins Today's News in 90 Seconds - August 21st Damages are also being sought by the businessman, who appeared on a tax defaulters list published by the Revenue Commissioners in June. Revenue said Mr Power had been penalised €781,061 by the courts for non-declaration of income tax. The entrepreneur filed for bankruptcy in Florida in 2022 with debts of just over $1m (€857m). His bankruptcy trustee recently applied to be discharged, saying the estate had been fully administered and there was no property available for distribution to creditors over and above that exempted by law. The Revenue was Mr Power's largest creditor. He originally faced three charges, contrary to the Companies Act, including knowingly or recklessly furnishing information to an electronic filing agent from 2014 to 2017. This followed an investigation by the Corporate Enforcement Authority relating to Dublin Distillers & Co Teoranta and the filing of B1 Annual Returns with the Companies Registration Office. Mr Power denies the charges, which had been due to be dealt with in the District Court. However, a connected matter led to a reappraisal of the case, and the DPP issued a new direction for a trial on indictment, elevating the prosecution to the Circuit Court, which can impose lengthier sentences. Mr Power was also faced with 84 new criminal charges, including forgery. He is alleged to have electronically amended a High Court order in December 2022 by adding information that was not granted by the court. Further charges related to breaches of tax law. His legal challenge to the prosecution was not unexpected. During a court hearing last November, he claimed the additional charges had been brought against him with 'malicious intent'. The DPP, Revenue Commissioners, Tax Appeals Commission, Corporate Enforcement Authority and the Garda Commissioner are among the respondents named in the action. Mr Power is representing himself in the proceedings and has yet to be given a date for a leave application for judicial review. The application is being made on notice to the respondents. In a statement of grounds, Mr Power claimed the respondents had conducted a 'hybrid investigation' that had violated his right to a fair trial and fair procedures. He further claimed the respondents had acted in excess of their jurisdiction and that he had been denied fairness and natural justice in administrative, civil and criminal proceedings arising from or connected to the prosecution.
Irish Examiner
18 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
'Trying' is not good enough when it comes to children's lives
Earlier this month, the High Court determined a failure to provide the transport a child needed to attend a school appropriate to his educational needs, did not amount to a breach of his constitutional and statutory rights. The child in question had been able to access the transport required to attend school 13 days in the school year, with 10 of those being for July tutoring. This case marks the latest in a series of judicial review proceedings being taken by families of children with disabilities in relation to their educational access needs. It goes hand in hand with the exponential rise in cases being taken under the Disability Act in relation to Assessments of Need and section 67 under the Education Act, in relation to the allocation of school places. In refusing the declaratory relief sought, Ms Justice Marguerite Bolger outlined a belief that this was not comparable to cases where 'little or nothing has been done'. Respectfully, I must disagree. In 2018, a Leaving Cert student successfully brought judicial review proceedings in relation to her results. Mr Justice Richard Humphreys focused on the "untold stress" of losing "initial crucial weeks" of a third-level course due to a marking error. One could be forgiven for wondering how the same system could produce this entirely different result in a case of a primary aged child who missed an entire year of school. Ms Justice Bolger outlined that everyone was trying here, the school tried to hire an escort to accompany the child, the bus company tried to find a taxi, the State eventually granted a home tuition grant (so the parents could hire their own teacher) over halfway through the school year. It all sounds terribly familiar though, doesn't it? These failures are not that of Bus Éireann or the schools. These are failures in the system itself that drive these children en masse out of their communities and then forces them to not only endure treatment that would be considered unacceptable for a non-disabled child, but which expects reverence and gratitude in return. This ruling is a missed opportunity for the courts to clarify that "trying" needs to stop being an acceptable defence to the flagrant disregard for the rights of children with disabilities in this country. It is clear a despondency has taken hold within our courts if we cannot see that a child unable to access an education, has in fact and in law, suffered a breach of the rights afforded to him under the constitution. It is further clear the role that parent carers in this country have subsumed has now grown so exponentially that our right to access employment is next to be sacrificed at the alter of "trying". Children denied access to education do not exist in some suspended animation until the State finds the time to meet their needs — someone still has to provide full-time care. The right to earn a livelihood does not apply to parent carers it seems, so long as someone, somewhere, is "trying". In closing remarks, it was acknowledged the minimal progress made in this case was likely as a direct result of the family initiating legal proceedings, and any parent who has been through it will instantly recognise that statement; the resources that are suddenly found once the lawyers come in. My daughter is among the many who will soon re-commence travelling across the city each morning to access a school that can meet her needs. Her brother will have the luxury of attending the local school, alongside the other children from our neighbourhood. Rebecca O'Riordan: 'My daughter is among the many who will soon re-commence travelling across the city each morning to access a school that can meet her needs.' Picture: David Keane They have access to a different childhood you see, one where parents speak at the school gates, where September brings opportunities for dance and drama classes. His childhood is not catalogued in court documents like his sister. She goes into first class in September with a mere two court cases under her belt, because in this macabre gauntlet, she's one of the lucky ones. This result is a missed opportunity and a worrying development within judicial review. These children's views are not ascertained when we design systems that dictate their existence, their dignity not considered when we design spaces that fail to account for their access requirements. When it comes to assessing their educational needs, when it comes to providing them with school places, lifesaving scoliosis surgeries, dignity-preserving adaptive equipment, all it takes is for the system to say its doing its best and it is instantly absolved of wrongdoing. We cannot stem the tidal wave of litigation in this area unless we acknowledge a failure to deliver policy is not personal. If we keep creating policies without consulting the end users, then we will continue to witness this spiral of needless suffering, where children's rights are continuously diluted. Critique of the systems that fail these children is not critique of the actors it is made up of. We do not have the time nor energy for personalisation — we merely ask that the courts acknowledge that "trying" is not good enough. Rebecca O'Riordan is a law student and full time carer
Irish Daily Mirror
a day ago
- Irish Daily Mirror
Man, 20, remanded in custody charged with facilitating organised crime
A young man has been remanded in custody after he appeared in court charged with a number of offences in relation to facilitating organised crime in Drogheda. Matthew Mooney, 20, of Moneymore in Drogheda, appeared before Dundalk District Court on Wednesday afternoon. He was arrested on Tuesday, August 19 under Operation Stratus, which was set up in 2018 as part of an ongoing investigation into alleged organised criminal activity in Drogheda, Co Louth and surrounding towns. He was brought before Dundalk District Court on Wednesday afternoon, where the court heard he is charged with seven offences under Section 73 of the Criminal Justice Act. That section relates to allegations that he committed a serious offence for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with, a criminal organisation. Mr Mooney is also further charged with allegedly possessing a mobile phone, for the alleged commissioning of a drug trafficking offence. The offences are alleged to have happened in Drogheda between December 2023 and February 2024. Judge Stephanie Coggans was told that arrest, charge and caution were made by way of schedule. An application for bail was not made for the alleged Section 73 offences as this can only be granted by the High Court. The accused was remanded in custody to appear before Dundalk District Court via video link next Wednesday, August 27. The judge also granted an application for legal aid. Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest news from the Irish Mirror direct to your inbox: Sign up here. The Irish Mirror's Crime Writers Michael O'Toole and Paul Healy are writing a new weekly newsletter called Crime Ireland. Click here to sign up and get it delivered to your inbox every week
