Acquitted of stolen stove charge

A householder has been acquitted of possessing a stolen stove which he said he bought from a man he spoke to on the phone.

David McLoughlin (40) (pictured) of 20 St John’s Terrace had pleaded not guilty to possession of an Olymberyl stove at his home on June 15 th 2016.

The case was heard over two days at Sligo Circuit Court before Judge Keenan Johnson and a jury of six men and six women.

Outlining the case for the prosecution, Ms Dara Foynes BL with Mr Hugh Sheridan (State Solicitor), said the stove had been installed in a house at O’Carolan Court in Mohill on February 19 th 2016 and it was stolen when the house was broken into between the 19 th and the 22nd.

Sergeant John Walsh told the trial that he obtained a search warrant on June 15 th at the District Court to search the home of the accused.

Sgt Walsh said two stoves had been stolen from number 10 and number 11 O’Carolan Court over the week-end of February 19 th-22nd. He carried out enquiries and these indicated that one of them had been installed in the home of the accused.

Sgt Walsh went to the accused’s home on June 15 th at 5.30pm. In the sitting room, witness showed the accused the search warrant and told him what he was looking for. McLoughlin pointed to a stove which was up against a wall in the sitting room. It wasn’t installed.

McLoughlin told the sergeant that was the stove and witness seized it. He said he did not ask the accused any questions at this time. Sgt Walsh said he was of the opinion this was one of the stoves which had been stolen in Mohill. Witness said he dismantled it as best he could and it was brought away in a patrol car with the help of other Gardaí and a neighbour. It was still in the possession of the Gardaí.

The owner of the stove, John Loftus called to Sligo Garda Station on July 18th and identified it as his through a serial number.

McLoughlin arrived by agreement at Sligo Garda Station on June 19 th for interview which lasted about 20 minutes.

The accused was asked how the stove came to be in his possession and he replied that he had got a call from a man asking him if he was still looking for a stove.

He told him that he was. He agreed to pay €450 for the stove. “That’s it basically,” he said.

He was asked did he know how much it was worth and he replied, ‘no.’

Sgt Walsh put it to the accused did he know that the stove was wroth €800 along with flues. McLoughlin replied that he didn’t know this.

He wouldn’t say who he had been talking to on the phone and he didn’t get a receipt either.

“Did you have an idea it was stolen?” - Sgt Walsh.

“I didn;t pass any heed to be honest. I didn’t care. I just wanted a stove for the house”- McLoughlin. Asked did he think he had been dealing with a legitimate dealer, the accused replied, “I don’t think so.”

He had made contact with this man through a friend. He lived alone at 20 St John’s Terrace and was in receipt of €188.50 dole per week.

In reply to Mr Keith O’Grady BL (defending) instructed by Mr Tom MacSharry, solicitor, Sgt Walsh agreed that the accused had no difficulty showing him the stove when he arrived at his home with the search warrant.

Witness also agreed that the retail price of the same stove at the time was €525. Sgt Walsh said when the matter was reported as stolen at Mohill Garda Station the value was stated to have been €700 and with flues was €800.

Garda Patrick Lynn gave evidence of John Loftus from Castlerea calling to the Garda Station in Sligo on July 18th and identifying the stove through a serial number.

Mr Loftus, a building contractor, told the trial he was refurbishing five houses on behalf of Leitrim County Council and was involved in fitting new heating systems which included stoves. He bought two stoves from Gordan Heating in Ballinasloe and they were fitted in number 10 and 11 O’Carolan Court in February 2016. When he returned to the houses after a week-end they had been stolen along with fittings and two windows broken and doors had been damaged during the process.

A copy invoice from the company in the amount of €1,240 for two stoves was handed in the court.

A few months after the theft he called to Sligo Garda Station and was shown a stove which he identified as one he had installed in the houses in Leitrim through a serial number he had on a piece of paper which came with it.

“I knew it was the stove I had fitted even before looking at the serial number,” he said.

In reply to Mr O’Grady, Mr Loftus agreed that the stove on its own without pipes was valued at €525. Witness told Mr O’Grady that he had to keep the paper with the serial numbers for forwarding to the county council as part of health and safety. He didn’t have those pieces of paper now.

Mr Loftus said the invoice he got from Gordan’s was stamped paid with a date of June 29 th but he could have paid the bill earlier. It was not his stamp.

At the conclusion of the prosecution case, Mr O’Grady made a submission in the absence of the jury to have the case withdrawn.

He said the documents which Mr Loftus had referred to with the serial numbers had not been produced. There was nothing to link the defendant’s stove to the stoves which were stolen from the houses in Mohill. Mr Loftus could not recall the serial number.

Agreeing, Judge Johnson said the identification of the stove had not been proven as the actual one stolen from the house.

That document with the serial number was a vital part of the State’s case and should have been disclosed to the defence, It was an essential proof, he said. He stressed this was a criminal trial and the absence of that document meant the defendant was entitled to a direction.

When the jury was recalled, Judge Johnson told them about the application from Mr O’Grady which was related to the identification of the stove. The Judge said Mr Loftus in his evidence could not remember the model or serial number of the stove and he wasn’t faulting him on this.

Judge Johnson said the document should have been available and he could not allow the case continue and he was directing them to find him not guilty by direction.

“The required standard hasn’t been met,” he told the jury. The foreman then signed the issue paper with a not guilty verdict. Judge Johnson thanked them for their service and discharged them from further service for five years.

A discussion then took place as to what to do regarding ownership of the stove which was in the courtroom. Ms Foynes suggested it could become the subject of a Police Property Application in due course while Judge Johnson said it was quite clear that Mr Loftus had been left bereft of a stove. He believed an application under the Police Property Act would succeed in Mr Loftus’s favour.

Mr O’Grady, having consulted with the accused, said he wasn’t making any claim to the stove. Judge Johnson then directed that it go to Mr Loftus.