Notorious criminal Gerard Mackin who pinned man to floor loses appeal against latest sentence

Gerard Mackin, with a previous address at Rhebogue Road in Limerick, was extradited from Alicante in Spain in December 2022 and pleaded guilty to laundering €4,780 as proceeds of criminal conduct at Rhebogue Road in Limerick on April 17, 2019.

Sentencing at the Special Criminal Court last May, Judge Tony Hunt said Mackin handled the money “in the context of some form of serious organized crime in the Limerick area”. While the sum of money, €4,780, was “at the lower end of the scale”, the judge said the circumstances were not and that Mackin’s previous conviction for assault causing harm was “relevant to this case because it explains the background on which the product is based”. of the crime in this case were handled.

Today at the Court of Appeal, Michael O’Higgins SC, for Mackin, argued that the overall sentence imposed by the court was “excessive”, the headline sentence of four years and eight months was “too harsh” and that the court got it wrong in not suspending a part of the sentence taking into account the mitigating circumstances of the case.

O’Higgins said the amount of money seized was small but it was just one piece of the puzzle. He said the context here was to juxtapose the very low amount with the fact that the money was wrapped in two mobile phones, one of which was capable of encrypting data.

O’Higgins said that while there was “no doubt” that the fact that the money was found wrapped in two mobile phones, one of which was capable of encrypting data, was a “worrying aspect”, the difficulty here was in the weight. the court had attached to this.

It was alleged that no evidence was adduced at the sentencing hearing that this offense or the previous conviction was linked to a serious criminal organisation.

He said the court did not have the “clarity” or “sure basis” to take the sentence “from the lower floor to the upper floor in the range in which it falls.”

Counsel also submitted that the trial judges failed to give due weight to the time elapsed since the commission of the offence, the earliest possible plea of ​​guilty, the appellant’s voluntary return to Ireland, his compliance with the gardaí and his rights. personal circumstances.

The lawyer argued that the 25% reduction given to the main sentence should have been greater given the mitigating factors in the case, including the fact that Mackin had appeared in court with a good work history and had struggled with alcohol problems in last. and the fact that the court had accepted the operation “was not sophisticated.” He said the court had the discretion to reduce the sentence by a third.

The court also made a mistake by not suspending part of the sentence, the lawyer stated, taking into account the mitigating circumstances and the principles of “proportionality and rehabilitation.” He said the trial judges noted the appellant’s intention to exit the criminal environment he had entered, but had not structured a sentence that would incentivize this rehabilitation.

Fiona Murphy SC, Director of Public Prosecutions, said no errors had initially been identified. She said there was “clear evidence” that the appellant was involved in an offense and that was the background to this offence.

In relation to the discount given to the main sentence, Ms Murphy said the court was entitled to consider all the circumstances and said there was discretion over what amount could be awarded for an early plea.

“The court has the right to grant any deduction it deems appropriate and it clearly did so,” he said.

Dismissing the appeal in a decision handed down this afternoon, Judge John Edwards said the Special Criminal Court was entitled to consider that the appellant’s involvement in the crime was “neither minor nor peripheral”.

He said that while the amount of money involved was only €4,780, two phones, one with encryption capability, were found encased in bubble wrap.

The judge also noted that Mackin lied about the source of the money and background, with initial suggestions that it was from the credit union and later claiming it was from the appellant’s work.

He said that while Gardai accepted Mackin had income, their evidence was that it did not come from any of those sources and was the proceeds of crime.

Taking into account Mackin’s previous conviction, the judge said that while he had already been punished and there was “no doubt” he would be punished a second time, “it was a factor to consider”.

As for the argument that the discount was not sufficient, he said the court had not been satisfied that the reduction was too low.

He said that the guilty plea was clearly valuable to the court and that the appellant had been granted a blanket discount of 25%.

The judge said the statement was the “main element of mitigation” and, while there were other factors, the extent to which they would have contributed would have been “modest”.

He said that while it is true that the court did not refer to the other mitigating factors such as their previous work history and family circumstances, they were “not required” to do so and there was no reason to believe they were not taken into account upon arrival. at 25% discount.

As a result, Mr Justice Edwards said the court dismissed the appeal against the severity of the sentence.

Mackin had pleaded guilty before the three-judge court to knowing or believing, or being reckless as to whether the property, €4,780, was the proceeds of criminal conduct, handled, acquired and/or possessed said property contrary to Section 7 of the Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Act 2010.

At the March 2023 hearing, Detective Sergeant Padraig O’Dwyer told Ms Murphy that two patrol officers had observed an Opel Insignia car parked suspiciously outside Mackin’s home on April 17, 2019. The driver He was searched and found to be in possession of €4,780 in cash, an Aquaris phone and an iPhone wrapped in bubble wrap and bound with elastic bands.

The court heard Mackin left his house and chatted to Gardai telling them the money belonged to him.

In January 2011, Mackin’s retrial for the murder of Edward Burns, a 36-year-old taxi driver and father of five, collapsed dramatically at the Special Criminal Court after the State adopted a ‘nolle prosequi’ (a decision not to process).

Several of Mackin’s supporters in court applauded and cheered as members of the victim’s family wept openly.

The prosecution’s main witness refused to give evidence at the trial after telling a judge at Belfast High Court that he was threatened that if he gave any evidence he would be shot dead.

Mackin had pleaded not guilty to the murder at Bog Meadow, Falls Road, Belfast, on March 12, 2007.

It was Mackin’s second trial after a 2008 conviction, which made Mackin the first person to be convicted in a Dublin court of an alleged murder in Belfast under a little-used cross-border anti-terrorism law, was overturned by the Court of Justice. Criminal appeal and a new trial was ordered.

In July 2013, a further nolle prosequi was brought against Mackin in a non-jury court on a charge of IRA membership and demanding money by threat in the name of the INLA in Co Monaghan on 18 and 21 May 2012.