The jury in the trial of Independent TD, Michael Lowry and his refrigeration company Garuda, on tax offences, has gone home for the night and will resume its deliberations on Monday.
The charges relate to a commission payment of around €372,000 due from a Finnish refrigeration company, Norpe OY, to Garuda in 2002 but paid to a third party in the Isle of Man instead, at Mr Lowry's direction.
The State says this payment was kept off the books in 2002, and that Mr Lowry and the company then tried to pretend it was made in 2006.
Garuda has pleaded not guilty to knowingly delivering incorrect accounts and information in relation to corporation tax for 2002. It has also denied making an incorrect corporation tax return for 2006 and failing to keep proper books of account.
Mr Lowry has denied that these offences were caused with his consent or connivance or that he caused them to be committed. A charge alleging that Mr Lowry himself had submitted an incorrect tax return for 2002 was dropped earlier in the trial.
Judge Martin Nolan told the jurors that the issue in the case was what Mr Lowry knew. He said they must be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that he knew the money was not included in the company accounts and tax computations.
He said Mr Lowry's explanation was that he had instructed a staff member to raise an invoice in 2002, assumed this had been done and the money automatically entered on the company's accounts.
Judge Nolan told the jurors that they must be satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that this is not true in order to convict. If they found the explanation reasonably believable they must acquit he said.
The judge said if the jury believed Mr Lowry did not know about the money appearing in Garuda's 2006 accounts, they must acquit on that charge as well.
Judge Nolan said they must deliver corresponding verdicts for Mr Lowry and Garuda as Mr Lowry is the company. He said the jury must look at the evidence in a commonsensical way and come to a decision coldly on the facts.
Earlier, Mr Lowry's Senior Counsel, Michael O'Higgins told the jurors the case against his client was deeply flawed from the get go and jaundiced from the outset.
He told them they could read a lot of stuff telling them about Mr Lowry - the people of Tipperary were almost shamed for returning him election in and election out he said. But Mr O'Higgins said there was no aura or mystery about him - he said Mr Lowry grafted.
He asked them if they found it bizarre that Mr Lowry was never interviewed by tax inspectors. He claimed the tax inspectors had put a summons out, without even having a case against Mr Lowry, because of time pressures.
He said the jury needed to focus on whether Mr Lowry had full knowledge of what had been accounted for in Garuda's books.
Mr O'Higgins said this was a case where there was an excessive form of zeal, a form of tunnel vision and a case brought that showed utter inflexibility and was disproportionate.
Defence counsel Patrick Treacy for Garuda Limited said there was an innocent explanation for a missing invoice in relation to the payment. He said Mr Lowry's secretary was told by Norpe, that an invoice had to come from the third party in the Isle of Man, Kevin Phelan, rather than Garuda.
Mr Treacy said the dropping of the charge against Mr Lowry personally was a key moment in the trial. He claimed that charge was "the engine driving the whole case" and when it was dropped the prosecution "went up with a puff of smoke".
He claimed that Revenue had overcooked the books in this case. He said the case related to the misfiling of an invoice and it was being presented to the jury as a gross fraud on the Exchequer.
He described the prosecution case as "madness", "relentless", "manic" and "a joke". He said the jurors should ask themselves if it was right that Mr Lowry should be prosecuted in Dublin Circuit Criminal Court in relation to an underpayment of just over five and a half thousand euro in corporation tax.
Prosecuting counsel Remy Farrell told the jurors that Mr Lowry would like the jury to believe that "a series of unfortunate events" had led to him being before the court.
He said no invoice was issued for the €372,000 payment, there was no paper record of it and the auditors were not informed about it when inspecting the 2002 accounts.
He referred to a letter signed by Mr Lowry in 2007 that talked about an invoice issued by Garuda which does not exist. Mr Farrell told the jurors Mr Lowry was "absolutely aware" of what was going on and he was inviting them to return guilty verdicts.
The jurors will resume deliberations at 10.30am on Monday morning.
