Kinahan associate Sean McGovern arrested after landing in Ireland from Dubai and is due before Special Criminal Court
The man named in court as a key member of the
Kinahan cartel
based in Dubai, Sean McGovern, is due to appear before an evening sitting of the
Special Criminal Court
in Dublin after his extradition flight from the
United Arab Emirates (UAE)
was delayed by around two hours.
Gardaí confirmed on Thursday evening that they had arrested McGovern following his extradition.
The 39-year-old Dubliner is facing a charge of murder, and of directing organised crime, related to the Kinahan-Hutch feud. The murder charge relates to the shooting dead of Noel Kirwan (62) in Clondalkin, Dublin, in December 2016.
Mr Kirwan was not involved in the Kinahan-Hutch feud or organised crime but was shot dead because he was a friend of the Hutch family and had been photographed at the funeral of feud victim Eddie Hutch in February, 2016.
READ MORE
McGovern had been living in Dubai since about 2016 and was a close associate, and key ally, of cartel leader Daniel Kinahan. McGovern was arrested at his Dubai last October on foot of an extradition request from Ireland and has been in custody in UAE since then.
A convoy of Garda Cars leave through the front gates at Casement Aerodrome, Baldonnel, after An Aer Corps Airbus C-295 landed with Sean McGovern on board. Photograph: Alan Betson
McGovern's flight landed at Casement Aerodrome, Baldonnel, Co Kildare, early Thursday evening. He was being flown back to Ireland, under
Garda
escort, on board an Air Corps aircraft, which departed Dubai on Wednesday night and refuelled several times on the journey to Ireland.
[
Analysis: High-risk extradition of Sean McGovern to involve armed escort and possible helicopter when flight lands in Dublin
Opens in new window
]
Minister for Justice Jim O'Callaghan has welcomed the extradition, though did not mention McGovern by name, adding it was proof of the 'excellent criminal justice co-operation' now in place between Ireland at the UAE.
'In recent years, the UAE and Ireland have worked together to advance criminal investigations into serious and organised crime,' he said. 'That strong cooperation was further strengthened by the decision to deploy a Garda liaison officer to Abu Dhabi last year and the negotiation of bilateral treaties on extradition and mutual legal assistance.'
Those treaties had come into force on Sunday, May 18th, after 'tireless work' by the Garda and Department of Justice and their UAE counterparts. The events now unfolding demonstrated the 'government will work through the necessary steps to pursue organised crime groups inflicting misery on our communities.'
The Garda's Deputy Commissioner Shawna Coxon said transnational crime gangs 'cause misery to communities not only in Ireland' but globally.
'They engage in murder, human trafficking and drug dealing,' she said. 'Tackling these gangs not only makes Ireland safer, but all the other countries they operate in as well.'
The extradition was 'another significant development in on our continued work with international law enforcement partners to disrupt and dismantle transnational organised crime gangs'.
Kinahan Cartel member Sean McGovern. Photograph: An Garda Síochána
Also not mentioning McGovern by name, as the extradition process was ongoing when she spoke on Thursday evening, Deputy Commissioner Coxon she said it had come about after 'intricate investigative work' by the Garda and international law enforcement partners.
'This work is not possible without the assistance of the Department of Justice, the Department of Foreign Affairs and the Director of Public Prosecutions.
'I want to particularly thank the Ministry of Justice at a judicial level in the United Arab Emirates. Our police-to-police co-operation globally is critical to the dismantling of organised crime.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
17 minutes ago
- Irish Times
Oil prices expected to jump after US attacks on Iran
US president Donald Trump 's decision to intervene on Israel's behalf in its war with Iran is likely to see crude oil prices spike when commodities markets open on Sunday night, experts have warned, with potential consequences for the Irish and world economies. Oil prices have increased by 11 per cent since Israel's June 13th attack on Iran, but moved sharply up and down last week as investors weighed the potential for the conflict to impact global oil supply. Mr Trump's decision to bomb Iranian nuclear sites overnight on Saturday is likely to result in spot crude prices surging in early trading when the market reopens at 11pm on Sunday. Brent crude, the global benchmark for oil prices, closed at $77 (€67) a barrel on Friday evening. READ MORE While it could take several weeks for higher crude oil prices to feed into petrol and diesel costs in Ireland, prices at the pump have been ticking upwards in recent days as tension ratcheted up in the Middle East. Saul Kavonic, an energy analyst at MST Marquee, told Bloomberg on Sunday the market's reaction will largely depend on Iran's response. 'But this could set us on a path toward $100 oil, if Iran responds as they have previously threatened to. 'This US attack could see a conflagration of the conflict to include Iran responding by targeting regional American interests that include Gulf oil infrastructure in places such as Iraq, or harassing passage through the Strait of Hormuz.' The maritime chokepoint at the mouth of the Gulf is a vital conduit for not just Iranian shipments, but also for those from Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Kuwait and other members of the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries. Washington's intervention in the war and the White House's messaging have injected fresh uncertainty into an already anxious macroeconomic environment. Even before Israel's strikes on June 13th that killed several senior Iranian military commanders, economists warned that the global economy had entered into a period of heightened volatility with clear risks for Ireland. In its financial stability review earlier this month, the Central Bank of Ireland warned that the structure of the Republic's economy and its high level of integration with global capital means the effects of 'geopolitical and macroeconomic shifts abroad' can be amplified domestically. 'The potential for further fragmentation in global supply chains or tightening in international financial conditions could have material implications for Irish firms and households,' the regulator said. – Additional reporting: Bloomberg
Irish Times
an hour ago
- Irish Times
Wills and spouses: Why you cannot just cut a wife out of your will
An acquaintance left all his assets, mainly his house which is probably worth about €250,000, to a distant relative. He had been on bad terms with his wife of about 50 years and left her nothing. They had no children and were not legally separated or divorced. Their only income was the contributory old-age pension. Now the relative has told the widow that he wants to take possession of the house to sell it and pay capital acquisitions tax. He has helpfully suggested that she should enter a care home. I know that, by law, the lady is entitled to two-thirds of the value of the house, irrespective of the will but, assuming that the facts are as I've given them: can the will even go to probate? Can the widow continue to live in the house indefinitely given her contribution to the marriage or for some other reason? READ MORE Did the solicitor who drew up the will have an ethical or legal obligation to ask if the man was married? When I made a will recently, the solicitor didn't ask me if I was married. Mr DF Well, this is a bit of a mess, isn't it? There's being on bad terms with a spouse, and then there's trying to cut her out of a will entirely after 50 years of marriage. It must have been some row. The approach of the distant relative to whom the house has been left in the will is also sadly lacking in empathy. What a wonderful pair. There's nothing like a will to show up the worst side of people. More to the point, this will is unsustainable. You simply cannot disinherit a spouse entirely – at least not unless they have been convicted of killing you, trying to kill you or trying to cause you serious harm. If you die without a will, your spouse will automatically inherit your entire estate where there are no children and two-thirds of the estate (by value) where there are children. And in a case like this, where there is a will, a spouse is entitled to what is called a legal right share. That lays down that the spouse is automatically entitled to one-half of the entire estate in a situation like your acquaintance's wife where there are no children. If there had been children, the legal right share would be one-third of the estate. This entitlement ranks ahead of any other beneficiary, regardless of what the will says. Only creditors rank higher – ie, debts left outstanding by the deceased. If she was deliberately left in the dark, I would expect any court to back her right So whatever this distant relative thinks, in an estate where the sole or main asset is the family home, the relative has no absolute right to it until the wife has her share. And the onus is not on the spouse to claim this. It is the legal responsibility of the executor to the estate to notify the spouse that she has the right to half of the estate (in this example), regardless of what the will says. Having said that, they do need to claim the right within six months of being informed by the executor, or one year of the grant of representation (probate) being issued. If she was deliberately left in the dark, I would expect any court to back her right. If they had been legally separated, provision would likely have been made one way or the other in the formal separation for the handling of the legal right share. That's common enough. Divorce would have extinguished it. But neither is the case here. It is also possible for someone to renounce a legal right share but, again, that is a formal scenario and there would be a written record. And if the spouse argues that they were pressured into so doing, or simply did not understand what they were doing, they would be in a strong position to challenge such a renunciation in court. So the idea that a distant relative can wander in and tell her 'Sorry love, I want you out to sell the house. Maybe you can head on to a nursing home' is quite simply deluded. They have no such right. And even in a case like this, where it appears the wife's name is not on the deeds of the property and her legal right share will not be sufficient to secure ownership of the house in its entirety, she is not without options. The first course of action would be to pay the difference between the value of her right share and the balance of the market value of the house. In your scenario, where it appears she would not have the financial resources to do so, she could make a case to a court on hardship grounds. The court can rule in those circumstance that the money does not have to be paid, although it is not obliged to do so. Whatever this distant relative thinks, in an estate where the sole or main asset is the family home, the relative has no absolute right to it until the wife has her share Has the solicitor drawing up the will on behalf of his client the moral or legal duty to inquire whether there is a spouse, and then to notify the client of the legal right share provision? No, not a legal or moral duty, but they certainly have a commonsense one. I cannot imagine a solicitor advising a mature client on their will where no mention is made of a spouse not at least querying whether there are any close family, given they would certainly be aware of the legal right share provision. After all, failure to do so and to make provision is only storing up trouble for the executor, who may well be the same solicitor, when they have to manage probate and the distribution of the estate. Please send your queries to Dominic Coyle, Q&A, The Irish Times, 24-28 Tara Street Dublin 2, or by email to with a contact phone number. This column is a reader service and is not intended to replace professional advice
Irish Times
5 hours ago
- Irish Times
Boston rape case: The full story of Dublin firefighter Terence Crosbie's trial
After a six-day trial and more than 22 hours of jury deliberations, a Dublin firefighter arrested on rape charges in a US city last year remains behind bars, his fate still in limbo. A Boston judge declared a mistrial and the jury 'hung' on Friday, sending the jury of eight men and four women home, and Terence Crosbie (38) back to the Nashua Street Jail. If a retrial moves forward, Mr Crosbie will once again face charges for raping a 29-year-old attorney. The alleged assault was first reported to authorities by the woman at a hospital in the early hours of March 15th, 2024. READ MORE The night began at The Black Rose, an Irish pub in the city on one of the busiest nights for the bar, leading up to St Patrick's weekend. The Black Rose Irish pub in Boston The woman alleged she returned to the hotel room of a Dublin firefighter she met at the bar for a night of consensual sex. She was with a man she described as a little shorter than herself, bald, white, with an Irish accent and who authorities later identified as Liam O'Brien. Mr Crosbie and Mr O'Brien had travelled to Boston as part of a Dublin Fire Brigade contingent that was due to march in the city's St Patrick's Day parade. The woman claimed she fell asleep in the other bed and woke up to another man who 'was not bald' but who 'also had an Irish accent' raping her. The man, she claimed, mocked Mr O'Brien and insisted that she 'wanted it'. All this occurred to the 'dull background soundtrack', as a prosecutor put it, of Mr O'Brien's continuous snoring. 'Our nightmares belong in our sleep,' prosecutor Daniela Mendes told the jury in her opening statement on the first day of trial. 'Her nightmare began as she woke up.' Throughout, Mr Crosbie was steadfast in his insistence that he was wrongly accused and had been held behind bars for 15 months, unable to make bail or afford living costs in the foreign country. 'I'm going to ask you to consider Mr Crosbie's nightmare. I'm going to ask you to end that nightmare,' said defence attorney Daniel C Reilly in his closing argument to the jury. The assault allegedly took place at the historic Omni Parker House, the hotel made famous as the location where a young US politician named John F Kennedy proposed to Jacqueline Bouvier. The case was heard blocks away at the Suffolk Superior courthouse, an art deco relic with marbled hallways and wood panel courtrooms in the heart of Boston. The Omni Parker House hotel in Boston The jury heard testimony from the woman and Mr Crosbie, with assistance from a transcript, at times, to parse Mr Crosbie's accent. His defence team alleged the woman was a 'less than reliable reporter due to intoxication and memory lapses'. They argued that she did not remember Mr O'Brien's first or last name or having ever met Mr Crosbie. They made insinuations about her promiscuity and questioned her about psychiatric medication on the stand. On the other side, the prosecution alleged Mr Crosbie's testimony was 'rehearsed and insincere'. The woman was the prosecution's first witness. She testified that on Thursday, March 14th she had been hosting a social work gathering, went to a restaurant with colleagues afterwards and then to The Black Rose with a coworker. In cross-examination, Mr Crosbie's legal team asserted she had been out drinking for more than 10 hours. Dublin Fire Brigade member Terence Crosbie (centre) alongside his defence lawyers Daniel C Reilly (left) and Patrick Garrity during his trial in a Boston court. Photograph: Susan Zalkind A witness for the defence – Dr Chris Rosenbaum, who serves as the director of medical toxicology for Newton Wellesley Hospital – testified that the complainant reported a 'prior history of binge drinking' in her medical documents and that her blood alcohol level at the time she reported the assault the next morning can 'correlate with memory loss and impairment'. He said she could have been almost three times the legal driving limit at the time of the alleged assault. Prosecutors argued that she had her wits about her. They played CCTV video of The Black Rose from the evening in question. In the witness box, she pointed herself out in the video to jurors as the individual dancing 'very awkwardly' and trying to get others to join in. She said Mr O'Brien and his colleagues were wearing T-shirts identifying themselves as members of the Dublin Fire Brigade. CCTV video later showed her and Mr O'Brien entering the hotel, just before midnight, taking the elevator and walking towards room 610. Other video footage showed Mr Crosbie walking to a lobby area on the sixth floor, adjust the chair and scroll through his phone for the next two hours. Terence Crosbie. Photograph: X The woman said she didn't know Mr O'Brien had a roommate. CCTV video and hotel records later supported Mr Crosbie's testimony that they met briefly at the bar and he was briefly in the room when the woman and Mr O'Brien first arrived, and that he 'read between the lines' and quickly left the room. She testified that after having sex with Mr O'Brien she went to the bathroom and left the light on. When she returned Mr O'Brien was already asleep and taking up the majority of the bed, so she got into the other bed and fell asleep, intending to leave and work from home the next day. She told the court she 'woke up to somebody on top of me' raping her, she told the court, in tears. 'This person was taller than Liam and was not bald and I could hear Liam snoring,' she said. The woman testified that the man, who prosecutors said was Mr Crosbie, also disparaged Mr O'Brien, while assaulting her, saying that Mr O'Brien 'can't even do this for you – what a loser'. She testified that she could feel his weight on top of her and she told him to 'stop!' But he didn't, the court heard. When she eventually managed to manoeuvre her legs off the side of the bed and break free, and started to collect her clothes, she testified that Mr Crosbie continued to follow her around the hotel room, trying to kiss her. She said she went to the bathroom and that Mr Crosbie tried to get in and 'was jiggling the handle' after she locked the door. Under cross-examination, defence attorney Mr Reilly noted that she initially reported that the assailant was about her height and her testimony did not include details about Mr Crosbie's birthmarks or tattoos. 'I was trying not to look,' she said. The prosecution noted that she texted a friend at 2.18am as she left the hotel. 'I hate everyone,' she wrote. 'What the f*** is wrong with people.' 'I woke up and a guy was inside of me telling me I wanted it and telling me how pathetic it was that his friend couldn't give that,' the court heard. She then walked home, changed and went to hospital, bringing the clothes she wore in the hotel. There she reported the rape. DNA analyst Alexis Decesaris testified that the evidence collected from the woman was 'consistent' with there being 'two individuals' separate from her who were both male. There was a high likelihood that one of those male profiles belonged to Mr O'Brien, the court heard, but due to the limited amount of material collected it was unclear if the second set of male DNA, obtained from the woman's genitals, was deposited by Mr Crosbie. The defence argued that the testing 'did not identify Terence Crosbie's DNA'. Prosecutors argued that the finding of two male profiles matched the woman's account. The jury heard from Mr Crosbie twice, in a recorded police interview before his arrest, and as the concluding witness when he took the stand in the trial. 'I 100 per cent didn't do this. I've done nothing wrong,' Mr Crosbie said. 'I had no physical or sexual contact with her at all.' He said he knocked on the door when he returned to the hotel and shouted for Mr O'Brien. He said the room was dark and he 'heard no reply'. He said he used the torch on this phone to find his way to his bed and the complainant wasn't there. 'There was nobody in my bed, my bed was empty,' he told the court. He said he brushed clothes off his bed, and crawled under the covers in his boxer shorts. About a minute and a half after he got into bed he testified that he heard someone 'rummaging around the room' and assumed the woman was collecting her things to leave. He disputed the woman's account that he called Mr O'Brien a loser; this was not 'an Irish term' that he would use, he argued. Mr Crosbie claimed he attempted to fly back to Dublin on an early flight home because he was 'scared like a rabbit in the headlights' after being questioned by police. When Mr Crosbie took the stand, prosecutors also played a portion of his interview with police that had been previously redacted in which he told detectives he had masturbated in the hotel room and asked whether his DNA could have got on the complainant that way. A pair of Mr Crosbie's underwear with semen on it was later collected as evidence. In cross-examination, prosecutors pointed out that Mr Crosbie would not have had time to masturbate alone in his room until after the alleged assault. Mr Crosbie's defence team stressed that his story about masturbation was 'hypothetical'. In closing arguments, prosecutor Erin Murphy told jurors that they 'might not agree' with or 'relate' to the complainant's choice to go to the hotel with Mr O'Brien but that it was 'her choice'. 'That doesn't mean that that man's hotel roommate gets to rape her,' she said. Mr Crosbie is not the 'unluckiest man in the world; he is the man who raped [the woman] and he is the man who got caught', she told the jury. Mr Reilly argued that prosecutors had not met their 'high burden' of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. 'I suggest to you there are multiple reasonable doubts in this case,' he said.
