Denis O’Brien case: USB to be kept in Dublin was in Rotterdam

The conspiracy case taken by businessman Denis O’Brien against Red Flag Consulting and a number of its employees and directors took a new twist on Friday when it emerged a USB stick which the court had directed should be kept in Mr O’Brien’s solicitor’s office in Dublin had for a time been with a company called Digitpol in Rotterdam.

It also emerged that even though Mr Justice Colm MacEochaidh in the High Court had directed that the stick be delivered “forthwith” to Eames Solicitors’ offices in Dublin, and that it not be interfered with in any way, it was in fact inspected at Digitpol.

Maurice Collins SC, for Red Flag and others, said what was being disclosed to the court constituted a “very serious situation”, given the judge had said there should be “no interference by anybody at all” - and this clearly had not occurred.

‘Encrypted chamber’

Martin Hayden SC, for Mr O’Brien, said the situation was being exaggerated and there had been no interference at all with the “encrypted chamber” on the stick which contained documents at the heart of the case.

If Red Flag believed there had been a breach of the court’s order, he asked, why had it not brought a motion to that effect.

Mr Collins said his clients wanted more information before deciding on their next step. His clients allege there was material interference with the content of the stick.

What emerged in court was that while Mr O’Brien had already had a company called Espion look at the stick, he had also engaged a Hong Kong-based company called Digitpol, which has an office in Rotterdam, to examine the device.

The company actually had the stick in its office in Rotterdam on October 16th last, when the judge ordered that it be delivered forthwith to Eames solicitors. Mr Justice MacEochaidh said he had presumed at the time that the stick was then in Dublin.

Not even looked at

He added that perhaps he should have made it clear that when he used the word “interfered”, he meant not even looked at.

The stick contains documents that were collated or written by Red Flag and which Mr O’Brien claims were at the heart of a conspiracy to damage him. He wants to know the identity of Red Flag’s client. Red Flag is resisting the claim.

As well as the stick being in Rotterdam for days after the judge’s order, Mr Collins said there had been changes made to who Red Flag had been told had looked at the stick at Digitpol.

The person who was principally responsible for what Digitpol did with the stick was Martin Coyne, he said.

It was agreed that Mr O’Brien’s side would produce an affidavit within two weeks replying comprehensively to the allegations made by the Red Flag side.

Mr Collins said his side could then decide whether it wished to bring a motion in relation to the alleged breach of a court order.