The Director of Public Prosecutions v Leonard Richter
Amount Forfeited
€13,300 & GBP £20
Court Date
8 February 2012
The Director of Public Prosecutions v Leonard Richter
Venue
Ennis Circuit Court
Judge
James O'Donohoe
Summary:
On 8 February 2012, Ennis Circuit Court ordered the forfeiture to the Exchequer of cash amounting to €13,300 and GBP £20 pursuant to Section 39, Criminal Justice Act 1994, as amended by Section 21, Proceeds of Crime (Amendment) Act 2005, on the grounds that it was proven on the balance of probabilities to represent the proceeds of crime, or was intended for use in criminal conduct. On 27 December 2008 Revenue Enforcement Officers at Shannon Airport seized and detained the cash from Leonard Richter, as it was about to be exported to the United Kingdom.
Following an investigation by Revenue’s Investigations and Prosecutions Division, a file on the matter was referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions who ordered the forfeiture proceedings.
Mr Richter initially denied the presence of cash in his luggage. A search of his checked-in luggage revealed €12,500 in 28 x €500 denomination notes concealed in a sealed envelope inside the pocket of a pair of jeans. Mr Richter had a further €1,500 and GBP £20 in his wallet. Mr Richter stated that the cash had been withdrawn from a bank but declined to say which one. He stated that he would rather not say what the purpose of his trip was as it was a private matter. Mr Richter subsequently stated that he had sold a car for €5,000 cash, that a friend, Philip McQuillan, had loaned him €7,500 cash and that his girlfriend, Claudia Murphy, had given him €200 as a loan and €500 to purchase clothing on her behalf. He claimed that he was travelling to the United Kingdom to purchase a car. It was proven to the Court that Mr Richter's claims did not stand up to scrutiny. Judge O’Donohoe ordered that the €700 cash be returned to Ms Claudia Murphy and the remaining €13,300 and GBP £20 be forfeited to the State.
Mr Richter, who represented himself throughout the proceedings, unsuccessfully contested the forfeiture application at the Circuit Court.