Breaking Ex-cathaoirleach pleads guilty to €172,000 theft from charity
Seán McKiernan, with an address at Trinity Bungalow, Virginia Road, Bailieborough in Co Cavan, was charged with 58 counts of theft at various unknown locations within the State.
The charges relate to thefts in amounts ranging from €500 to €7,500 from Navan Mental Health Housing Association on dates in 2019.
McKiernan, 43, appeared before Judge John Martin at Trim Circuit Court, where the former Fine Gael councillor pleaded guilty to two sample charges.
The first sample count relates to the theft of €5,230 on 26 March 2019 at an unknown location, while the second count involves the theft of €800 from the Meath-based charity on the 6 April 2020.
McKiernan was a councillor for the Bailieborough electoral area from 2007 to 2014.
He made history in 2011 when, at age 29, he was elected as the youngest ever Cathaoirleach of Cavan County Council.
He was a member of the Cavan Monaghan Education Training Board and served a term as its chair.
McKiernan was also a member of the national executive of Fine Gael for over a decade.
Free legal aid was previously granted to Mr McKiernan in the form of a solicitor and two barristers.
Judge Martin remanded McKiernan on continuing bail to appear before Trim Circuit Court on 21 October next for a sentencing date to be set.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Irish Sun
12 hours ago
- The Irish Sun
I'm raging after catching my neighbour STEALING electricity & this was after they caused our water to be cut off too
A WOMAN was left shocked after discovering that her neighbour has been stealing her electricity. The 29-year-old revealed that she recently moved to a new city with her husband and one-year-old child - and problems started to arise with her neighbour. Advertisement 3 A woman was left shocked after discovering her neighbour was stealing electricity from her Credit: Reddit She explained that they live in a semi-detached building, and share a wall with their neighbour, who is in their late 40s or early 50s. The first issue they had with the neighbour is that she didn't pay her half of the water bill, and as they share one water metre, it was cut off. The US-based woman wrote on 'We've given a lot of grace considering she smokes weed and it seeps through that wall so you can smell it through our restroom and child's room.' Advertisement More on neighbours Things reached a head when they spotted she had been stealing electricity from them by plugging in a lead to go to her house. They immediately texted her asking what was going on, and her replies were rather emotional. She replied saying: 'I'll unplug asap, and I'll come right over to tell [sic] to you. 'It's been the worst week and I don't know how much more I can take.' Advertisement Most read in Fabulous She added in a later text: 'I'm at my wits end. 'Everything is falling apart and my daughter won't help me. Your kids are breaking law if they kick their ball over neighbour's fence, High Court rules after couple sued next door 'My electric bill is 2000 dollars because I went the whole year without paying everything myself. 'I'm paralyzed and I'll be sitting in the dark again in about 2 hours. Advertisement 'NOONE can help me. And I'm so tired, I can't ask anyone for anything else. I'll be homeless.' The woman whose electricity was being stolen said they were also going through a hardship. She texted back: 'I feel like we've been respectful neighbors to you and would appreciate to be treated the same way. 'If you could have simply asked us out of respect we would have worked some type of agreement with you. Advertisement 'I understand you're going through hardship but we are too. 3 The woman replied saying she felt like the neighbour had taken advantage of her Credit: Reddit 'And we feel like you plugging into our electricity without asking is taking advantage of us thinking we're just a dumb young couple who won't notice. 'I understand you have a child you're taking care of but we have a baby we're trying to better provide for.' Advertisement They explained that they would be now letting the property management handle the situation. 3 The neighbour offered to pay $100 for the electricity Credit: Reddit PAY BACK In response to this, the neighbour said she had been "embarrassed" to ask for help, and offered them $100 to pay them back for the electricity. Many people were shocked at the encounter, with one saying: 'She shamelessly plugged it in but too scared to admit fault. Instead of just owning up to her mistake, she's whining about how awful things have been for her. Coward.' Advertisement Another added: 'There was no mistake here. What she did was very deliberate and had her sob story ready to go to guilt the neighbor into letting her continue to leech.' I had a two-year bin war with my next door neighbour Gemma Smith and Sophie Wood were engaged in a weekly feud for a year over their wheelie bins. When Gemma, who is single and doesn't work due to stress, says: 'Sophie seemed nice and we'd stop and exchange pleasantries. 'But it all changed at the beginning of 2022, when Sophie's bin was full and she put her rubbish bag in mine. 'I took it out and put it on top of her bin. 'It fell off, gulls pecked at it and there was rubbish everywhere.' Both women refused to clear up the mess, claiming it was the other one's fault. Gemma says: 'I felt so angry. 'There was cat litter spread all over my drive — it was absolutely disgusting and we ended up shouting at each other. 'We were both as bad as each other — we'd walk past each other and I'd tell her she was a lazy cow and to clean up after herself. 'We'd scream insults at each other." Within six months Sophie had set up a CCTV camera and threatened to report Gemma to the council. In retaliation, Gemma set up the baby monitor — which can record video — to try to pin more wrongdoing on Sophie. Then last July Sophie spotted Gemma in tears on her doorstep following a burglary at her home. Gemma says: 'Sophie came straight round and asked if there was anything she could do. 'We are now the best of friends and help each other out all the time."
Extra.ie
16 hours ago
- Extra.ie
Marian Price sues Disney over Say Nothing series
Old Bailey bomber Marian Price has sued Disney over an allegation in its Say Nothing series that she shot dead Jean McConville. The veteran Republican, also known as Marian McGlinchey, has previously denied firing the shots that killed the mother of ten more than 50 years ago. Ms McGlinchey, a former member of the Provisional IRA, claimed through her lawyers that she had 'no alternative' but to sue The Walt Disney Company Ltd and Minim Productions Ltd. Marian Price. Pic: George Sweeney/REX/Shutterstock Say Nothing, a nine-part Disney+ series, focused on the life of her late sister, Dolours Price. The pair were convicted for their part in the IRA car-bomb attack on London's Old Bailey in 1973. A plenary summons in Ms McGlinchey's defamation case was filed at the High Court in Dublin on Wednesday, and yesterday her solicitors, Belfast-based Phoenix Law, confirmed that legal proceedings are under way. It said these followed 'the egregious and defamatory allegations levelled at our client in the Say Nothing series'. Jean McConville. Pic: REX/Shutterstock The legal firm continued: 'Both entities have failed to take steps to rectify their actions, causing continuing and untold damage and harm to our client. 'Our client has therefore been left with no alternative but to issue formal legal proceedings to establish the truth and to protect her reputation.' Solicitor Victoria Haddock stated: 'Our client should not be placed in the position of having to take formal legal action to vindicate her reputation. Marian Price. Pic: Niall Carson/PA Wire 'Despite multiple opportunities to address the defamatory content of the Say Nothing series, Disney and Minim Productions have failed to take any step to do so. 'There is no justification for making abhorrent accusations under the guise of entertainment and we will be seeking to hold all responsible parties to account.' Ms McConville was abducted, murdered and secretly buried by the IRA in 1972, after being accused by the IRA of passing information to British forces. Her body was found at Shelling Hill beach in Co. Louth, in 2003. In 1999, the IRA acknowledged it had killed Ms McConville and eight others of the Disappeared. A report by the Police Ombudsman found no evidence that she had ever been an informer. At the launch of the series last year, Disney described Say Nothing as 'a gripping story of murder and memory in Northern Ireland during The Troubles'. Say Nothing is based on the 2018 book of the same name by Patrick Radden Keefe, a staff writer at The New Yorker magazine. In an interview last December, he said he was 'completely certain' Marian McGlinchey was the third member of an IRA team who killed Ms McConville. At the time the book was published, Ms McGlinchey released a statement through solicitor Peter Corrigan, also of Phoenix Law. He said: 'My client Marian Price vehemently denies any involvement in the murder of Jean McConville. No legal action followed the publication of the book.
RTÉ News
16 hours ago
- RTÉ News
Bob Vylan: Is there a clear legal basis for a case against them?
Police in the UK have confirmed they are investigating a performance by punk duo Bob Vylan at the Glastonbury Festival, after the group's singer led chants of "Death to the IDF [Israel Defence Forces]" during their set on Saturday, 28 June. Several UK-based politicians and commentators have condemned the remarks, with some claiming they amount to antisemitism. What chance is there of the case progressing to prosecution or trial? To try to understand that we asked legal experts where UK law draws the line on protest, free speech, hate crime, and public order. What are the police investigating? On Monday evening, Avon and Somerset Police confirmed they had "recorded" Bob Vylan's Glastonbury performance as a public order incident and have launched a criminal investigation into both the band and Irish rap trio Kneecap, based on potential hate crime or public order offences linked to their sets on Saturday. It has not yet been defined which parts of either group's performances are being examined as part of the criminal investigation. Within minutes of Bob Vylan coming off stage at the festival, several accounts online accused the group of antisemitism. During their set, they had led the crowd with chants of "Death to the IDF," and "Free, Free Palestine." Over the days that followed, the band faced both support and criticism for the language used. While most vocal support came from pro-Palestinian fans, activists, and fellow artists, the band has faced significant backlash from politicians, commentators and prominent Jewish figures, including the UK Chief Rabbi. On Sunday, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer labelled the comments as "hate speech." Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy followed on Monday, arguing that because Israel's military conscription system requires all young people to serve in the military "chanting death to the IDF is equivalent to calling for the death of every single Israeli Jew." Despite pushing back strongly against accusations of antisemitism on Tuesday, and saying they were "being targeted for speaking up," the band have since been dropped by their agency and management, had upcoming shows cancelled, and now face the prospect of a potentially lengthy legal battle. What would form the basis of a prosecution? While the police can investigate and recommend any charges, it is ultimately up to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to launch a prosecution. Prof David Mead, an expert in protest and public order law at the University of East Anglia, says any prosecution would have to pass two main legal tests. "First, the CPS would need to be satisfied that there is enough evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction. Second, they would have to decide whether bringing charges is in the public interest," Prof Mead said. Prof Mead added that a conviction would ultimately require a jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that all elements of the offence are proven, including the words used, how they were intended, and their likely impact on the audience. The legal burden: What prosecutors must prove Jonathan Hall KC is a leading UK barrister and the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation appointed by the UK's Home Secretary. Speaking to RTÉ, Mr Hall said the key piece of legislation that could be used against the member of the group Bob Vylan who uses the stage name 'Bobbie Vylan' would be Section 18 of the Public Order Act 1986. "The principal candidate for people who make public pronouncements that could bring down hatred on groups, on minority groups or protected groups, is what's called stirring up racial hatred," Mr Hall said. However, he added that the police could struggle to bring charges under that legislation "unless their investigation turns up something that we don't know about." "It's quite hard to show off the back of saying 'Death to the IDF' that he intended people in the audience to hate Jews," Mr Hall said, "that's because what he said was to a military of a country - although, there is an exceptionally strong link between Jews and that country." There is another possible interpretation of that same offence, Mr Hall said, that even if Bobby Vylan "didn't intend" people in the audience to hate Jews "he must have known that was the likely effect." "Again, I think it's quite hard to prove the likely effect of saying, 'death to the IDF' that people are going to hate Jews, rather than just be very hostile towards that military body," Mr Hall said. Prof Mead agrees that the key legal test hinges on interpretation. "The battle is this: should 'Death to the IDF' be seen as aimed at stirring up hatred against the Israeli military, or against Israelis as a people more broadly? Only if it targets a group defined by race or nationality can the offence possibly be made out," he said. When does protest cross into harassment? However, Prof Mead says another charge could potentially be brought against Bob Vylan under section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986, which covers threatening or abusive language likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress. "This is the most commonly used public order 'speech' crime as it is easiest to prove and thus very likely here that CPS would go for it," Prof Mead said. The CPS would only need to show that someone present was likely to feel harassed or alarmed, even if no one actually did, a threshold already established in case law, Prof Mead explained. Mr Hall also said it would be possible to bring a case on those grounds but that he would "have to see what the investigation shows, because it's hard to prove that he [Bob Vylan's singer] realised that there were Jews in the audience, and he was saying this in order to harass them." In a statement on Tuesday, Bob Vylan attempted to clarify their position saying: "We are not for the death of Jews, Arabs or any other race or group of people," adding that they "are for the dismantling of a violent military machine" that "has destroyed much of Gaza." Whether or not that defence holds weight would depend heavily on intent, which is central to any criminal prosecution under UK law, Mr Hall says. "The 'intending' is really important with criminal law, particularly with what you call speech offences," he said. "From a criminal law perspective, the circumstances in which you make it a crime to say something are limited. One of the key limits is what do you intend, or what do you believe is going to happen?" Referring to the music of NWA, a hip-hop group that rose to prominence in Compton, California in the 1980s, Mr Hall said there are examples in their music which is "implicitly saying 'kill the cops.'" "No one's going to say that's what they were intending anyone should do as a result of it," he said. "I think that if you had a prosecution of someone involved in a music festival, they would inevitably say, 'I'm a performer, I'm on stage. How can you begin to prove that I meant that like some gang lord telling his lieutenant to carry out a hit?'" How does this compare to other recent cases? In recent days, a number of prominent UK politicians and commentators - including the Conservative Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp - have likened the situation to the case of Lucy Connolly. Connolly was jailed for 31 months in October 2024 after using social media to call for hotels housing asylum seekers to be set on fire during the Southport Riots last summer. In a post on X, Mr Philp said of Bob Vylan "they should be arrested and prosecuted – just like some of those who did the same during the riots." The case has also reignited claims of a so-called "two-tier" approach to policing. Andrea Jenkyns, a Reform UK mayor, said that if Bob Vylan are not arrested over their chants, it would be evidence of a "two-tiered justice system." But there is little legal basis for that claim, according to Prof David Mead. "The idea of a 'two-tier' criminal justice system following the conviction of Lucy Connolly is, in my view, very misplaced. The IDF is a powerful state army thousands of miles away. Those seeking refuge in the UK are vulnerable private citizens at immediate risk should anyone take up her suggestion," Prof Mead said. Steve Kuncewicz is a partner at a law firm in Manchester and specialises in legal issues involving social media. In the Lucy Connolly case, he said, there was a "very different set of an awful lot of other evidence that went into that case." "That was a very specific call to action to cause harm to a very specific part of the community. There was a real risk in... the Southport riots, that that would be likely to happen." "It's a recurrence that's being drawn, but again, it's a very dangerous one, and it's an incorrect one. It's the two completely different kinds of incidents." The likeliest outcome? Ultimately, any prosecution would hinge on proving intent, that the Bob Vylan chant was meant to stir up racial hatred or harass Jewish people. "At the moment, I think that off the back of what I've seen from the footage of Glastonbury, I'm sceptical that they would have that," Mr Hall said. He's also, he says, "sceptical that you could prove in the course of law that he was using the IDF as a substitute code word for Jews." In the current climate in the UK, Mr Kuncewicz believes the wider political pressure could still influence how police approach the case. "Whatever happens, it's going to be very, very heavily scrutinised. But I do think given the current atmosphere we're in, the police may feel a bit more compelled to make an example here because they might see it as an incitement to violence."
