Wednesday, January 30, 2008

The Criminal Part Of The Assets

The Criminal Assets Bureau has intentions of selling John Gilligan's assets, but he doesn't see why.

He didn't kill Veronica Guerin, so why has the Jessbrook Equestrian Center been confiscated by the government? The former drug kingpin has been in court, fighting against the loss of both his beloved horse farm and his other real estate holdings. For an hour, he argued in the High Court that since he didn't pull the trigger, or have anything else whatsoever to do with Ms. Guerin's death, he shouldn't have to suffer.

The problem is, Mr. Gilligan isn't facing the confiscation of his property because of his purported involvement in the murder. He was convicted of drug trafficking, a punishable offense, and his punishment is to have the government take back his ill gotten gains. CAB wants his former possessions because they were paid for by profits generated by illegally selling drugs.

Mr. Justice Feeney tried to keep Mr. Gilligan on track, to tell the court why a receiver should not be appointed to unload Jessbrook and the Lucan homes. The Guerin murder has nothing to do with the matter at hand.

A terrible thing it was, that murder, and on that everyone agrees. As for the drug dealing aspect, Mr. Gilligan would like the court to know that he doesn't own anything at all these days. Jessbrook is in his ex-wife's name, you see, and those houses in Lucan aren't really his either. It was a mistake, made by a bumbling solicitor.

Mr. Gilligan's offspring bought those houses, although daddy helped out. He only wanted his solicitor to work things out so that any financial finagling by the kiddies would be brought to Mr. Gilligan's attention. That explains why John Gilligan's name appears on legal documents of property conveyance, you see? The son was a junkie and the son-in-law was a crook, so any right-thinking father would want to know ahead of time if they were taking advantage of his largesse.

Is there no honesty among thieves, he might have asked. In reply, the court might then ask Mr. Gilligan what part of criminal assets he doesn't understand.

No comments: