by the press coverage of late about his indispostion to appear in court. (This is not to appear on any charge against himself you will remember, it’s to give evidence in proceedings between a former client, property developer Brian Cunningham, and building society, First Active. )
If he’s offended at the coverage given by Dearbhail McDonald and her colleagues in the mainstream media one can only imagine how he feels about Maman Poulet??!! Raymond Murphy (ah remember him!) told the court that his client Mr. Lynn has taken exception to it.
And you know spending ages talking about when his birthday actually is and whether he wanted to give evidence or not is only making him happier that someone is talking about him at all! The phrase ‘You Couldn’t Make it up’ rings so true about the case currently before Justice Clarke.
Related articles by Zemanta
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=4387406a-c3f8-4ef4-86f6-0b838419c0e7)
The poor thing. Would you liberal media types not leave him alone?
Irish Election » Michael Lynn is offended | Maman Poulet // Oct 15, 2008 at 11:30
[...] Michael Lynn is offended | Maman Poulet [...]
hey, im just wondering what exactly the last line of your blog is meant to infer?
while i agree with you about Michael Lynn in general (who wouldnt!), the case itself before Clarke is a valid and complex case with a long long history. It would not have got this far unless the Court felt that First Active had a case to answer.
I would be willing to discuss the matters with you privately if you would prefer… but i am really intrigued as to your interpretation of the case itself…
Thanks
Stu
Michael Lynn is a victim of the totally unprofessional behaviour of our so -called banking system.
I think Brian Goggins & CO were as wreckless not alone with bank monies but with their shareholders funds as well and deserve to be treated in the same light as Nick Leeson of Barings fame.
The system stinks and the likes of not alone Lynn but also property developers should take legal action against the finiancial houses for allowing this fiasco.
The banks wanted to sell monies at the cheapest solution and got caught by having 100 big customers rather than 10,000 smaller ones