AMCLO0000035
AMCLO0000035
Tues oy
J.J.Rice, BA. LL.M. MA
fee John J. Rice & Co
SOLICLLORS DX 489NR Belfast I Y. McEvoy, LLB.
website - johnjricesolicitors.com ———
email:{ J. Melanophy, LL.B.
V.AT. Reg.
Outside Office Hours: BT Pager Not
£. O'Connor, LL.B.
P. Dougan, LL.B. LL.M.
D. Sherlock, LL.B. LL.M.
Our Ref: Your Ref:
IM/MP/CRIM
19" April 2004 Faxed to:
faked 04 %o~OG-°G
The Crown Court Section
Laganside Courthouse
45 Oxford Street
BELFAST
Dear Sir/Madam.
Re; Alan McLaughlin 04
Please find enclosed defence statement.
SOLICITORS
Ene..
Offices
© Law Society House © 39 Movilla Street @ 33 Cathedral Road
‘Armagh BT61 7QX
94 Victoria Street
Belfa 2
AMCLO0000035
AMCLO0000035
I
I
I
I
I
AMCLO0000035
AMCLO0000035
R-v- ALAN McLAUGHLIN
DEFENCE STATEMENT
Served pursuant to section 5 of the Criminal Procedure and
Investigations Act 1996
Background:
The defendant faces 15 allegations of false accounting contrary to Section I 7( Ha
of the Theft Act (Northern Ireland) 1969.
The offences are alleged to have occurred on various dates between 13"
December 2000 and 26" July 2001 in the County Court Division of Belfast.
At the time, the defendant was working in hi:
Brookfield Post Office, Tennent Street, Belfast.
pacity as a sub-postmaster at the
Admissions / denials:
The defendant accepts that during the relevant time he was working in his
capacity as a sub-postmaster at the Brookfield Post Office. Teanent Sire
Belfast.
The defendant was a self-employed individual operating under a franchise
agreement with, at that time, Consignia from July 1999 until July 2001. The
premises from which the business was operated weie the subject ofa 5-year lease.
held by the defendant.
The defendant did not work at the premises afier July 2001. However. he allowed
the premises to be used for the purposes of running a post office until the business
ceased trading in February 2002.
It is understood that the post office business was deemed no longer linanvially
viable by February 2002. It is also understood that significant and unexplained
losses were still surfacing in the business after July 2001 when the defendant
ceased having any direct role in it.
‘The defendant accepts that he amended and altered certain documents. as detailed
in his interviews. The full extent of the defendant's case is set out in his
interviews, the particulars of which can be referred to.
However. the defendant denies that he amended and altered the said documents
dishonestly or that he was motivated by dishonesty.
He further denies that he was acting, whether as alleged or at all. with a view to
gain by himself or another.
Specifically. the defendant denies that he intended to cause loss to another. or that
such loss was caused to another.
The defendant would say that his only intention was to balance the accounts in the
business and that his actions were actuated by no improper motive.
The defendant denies that he caused a loss to the post office to the value of
£10.288.47. He would say that the charges in the indictment do not reflect this
value and this figure has been arrived at by taking all of the input errors for the
given period and attributing them to the defendant. The defendant would say that
a large number of these identified transactions have not been carried out by him.
Further, these transaction errors may have been rectified at a later stage.
the defendant would say that the conduct alleged by the Crown. the totality of
which is not accepted in any event, does not make out the 15 charges of false
accounting contrary to Section 17(1)a of the Theft Act (Northern Ireland) 1969.
Points taken issue with:
The defendant takes issue with the evidence of the prosecution witnesses in this
case insofar as they tend to suggest. imply or infer that the defendant engaged in
false accounting contrary to Section 17(1) a of the Theft Act (Northern Ireland)
1969. whether as alleged or at all. save unless stated otherwise in this statement.
In particular, the denies that he amended and /or altered the said documents:
(i) dishonestly or that he was motivated by dishonesty,
(ii) with a view to gain by himself or another.
(iii) intending to cause loss to another, or
(iv) such that a loss was caused to another.
the defendant would take issue with any Crown evidence that would tend to
suggest. imply or infer that his intention was not to balance the accounts in the
business and / or that his actions were actuated by an improper motive.
The defendant only accepts such alteration or amendment of documentation as is
disclosed in his interviews and only to the manner and extent that this is detailed
in his interviews.
AMCLO000035
AMCLO0000035
AMCLO0000035
AMCLO0000035
The defendant takes issue with any assertion that he caused a loss to the post
office to the value of £10,288.47, as particularised above.
The defendant would say that he had experienced difficulties in balancing the
accounts from the time that he took over the franchise. He believes that this may
have been largely the fault of the accounting system and/or equipment that he was
obliged to use. The system rarely, if ever. balanced and was always prone to
error.
The defendant would say that the Post Office (Consignia) was aware of account
balancing problems and errors in the system that the defendant was experiencing.
The Post Office sent in people to try to help the defendant with the problems that
he was experiencing. but the problems were never remedied and the source of the
problems was never discovered.
Furthermore. the defendant takes issue with the manner in which he was
interviewed.
The defendant requires any further material to be disclosed that assists with his.
defence as now disclosed. Any material that undermines the credibility or
reliability of the witnesses in the case. or the allegations made should be disclosed
forthwith. In particular. and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing.
the defendant requires to be disclosed:
(a) Any and all information, in whatever form recorded. indicating a version
of events inconsistent with the Crown case and consistent with the
defendant's innocence:
(b) Any other notes, documentation or memoranda relating to the incident or
the investigation thereof:
(c) Any and all records compiled by the investigating officer. including the
officer's report on the incident:
(d) Full audit reports for the business for audits carried out prior to 26" July
2001;
(e) Full details of audit and findings for audit carried out on 26" July 2001, if
any:
(1) Full details of trial balances retained by the post office. not already
disclosed:
(g) Full history and details of accounts / reports submitted by the defendant
for the period relevant to the charges. whether submitted automatically by
computer or otherwise;
(h) Any relevant reports and assessments retained by the post office relating to
Brookfield post office;
(i) Details of trading after the defendant ceased having any direct role in the
business (including details of any significant and unexplained losses and
or balancing problems and / or other accounting errors that were present):
(j) Any and all documentation or material. in whatever format. show ing or
tending to show that the defendant had ongoing difficulties in balancing
the accounts from the time that he took over the franchise:
(k) Any and all documentation or material. in whatever format, show ing or
tending to show that the computer operating system that the defendant was
obliged to use was prone to error and / or faults (not limited only to faults
AMCLO0000035
AMCLO0000035
i
I
AMCLO000035
AMCLO0000035
experienced by the defendant but also general reported or discovered faults
across the system as experienced by other post-office franchises in a
position similar to the defendant.
Any and al! documentation or material. in whatever format. showing or
tending to show that the post office (Consignia) was aware of all of the
account balancing problems and errors in the system that the defendant
was experiencing.
(dl
The defendant serves this defence statement to satisfy the statutory requirements
placed upon him by Section 5(6) of the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act
1996. The defendant reserves his Convention rights and challenges the
compatibility of the Act with his Convention rights.
The defendant reserves the right to amend or alter this statement as and when full
disclosure and particularisation is made by the Crown.
Signed .
Dated ...47./4%
This defence statement is served by John J Rice & Co Solicitors for the defendant
of 9-11 Crumlin Road. Belfast
AMCLO0000035
AMCLO0000035