Mr Ray Burke's recollection that he was not expecting anybody from Murphys for the meeting at which a political contribution was to be made differed from that of developer Mr Michael Bailey, the tribunal was told.
Mr Michael Bailey would tell the tribunal that he recalled informing Mr Burke in a phone call before the meeting in June 1989 that he would be bringing a third party, a representative of the Murphy group, Mr Bailey's lawyer said. The third party was Mr James Gogarty.
Mr Colm Allen SC, for the Baileys and Bovale, said Mr Burke had stated that Mr Michael Bailey had made contact with him which led to the meeting on June 8th or 9th, 1989, at Mr Burke's home, and that it was Mr Burke's understanding that Mr Bailey would be going on his own.
Mr Burke said: "That's my understanding. That was the evidence I gave. That's what happened."
Mr Allen said Mr Burke said he had expressed a measure of surprise when he opened the door and found that Mr Bailey was there with the other person. Mr Burke said that was correct.
Mr Allen said: "I want to put it to you that it is Mr Bailey's recollection and he has told the tribunal that insofar as he recalls he would have indicated to you in the course of the telephone conversation that he was bringing a third party and that third party was a representative of Murphys. He will say he would not have referred to them as JMSE. I'm putting it to you as it is my client's best recollection."
Mr Burke replied: "Well, if that's your client's best recollection, but that's not as I recall it and that was as I gave my evidence and that is as it happened as far as I'm concerned but it could be his recollection. This is all 10 years ago."
Mr Frank Callanan SC, for Mr Gogarty, cross-examining, said could he summarise Mr Burke's evidence that "on the morning of June 8th or 9th, 1989, Mr Michael Bailey, someone you only knew very slightly, brought to your home someone whom you didn't know at all, acting on behalf of a company with which you had no dealings of any kind to make a donation to you of £30,000 from that company of whom you had no inkling or foreknowledge". Was there anything in that summary from which he would like to dissent?
Mr Burke said the only thing was that he would have known Mr Bailey. Mr Callanan had said "very slightly" but it was basically accurate.
Mr Callanan referred to the phone call from Mr Bailey the day before the meeting. Had he ever rung him before? Mr Burke said he was sure he did but he could not remember chapter and verse. He was not saying he did or he did not. It was quite possible he did. Mr Bailey was building houses at the back of his house in Swords.
Mr Callanan said he was saying that when Mr Bailey rang he made no reference to JMSE or Murphys.
"When he came to my door and had somebody else with him I was most surprised," said Mr Burke.
Mr Callanan said even though they now knew that, it conflicted with Mr Bailey's account.
Mr Burke said he was saying under oath that was his position.