Brian Murphy – Deloitte County Cork

A summary of what happened?

Brian Murphy, a former partner at Deloitte’s Cork office, has been implicated in several tax-related offenses. In February 2014, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) issued a criminal summons against him concerning a VAT refund claim made on behalf of Securemed Limited, where Murphy served as a director.

In October 2023, at Cork Circuit Criminal Court, Murphy pleaded guilty to multiple offenses:

• VAT Offenses: As a director of Securemed Limited, he knowingly delivered incorrect VAT returns for the periods of January–February 2011, July–August 2011, and January–February 2012.
• Income Tax Offenses: He knowingly delivered incorrect income tax returns for the years 2008 and 2009.

The total amount involved in these fraudulent activities exceeded €120,000. Murphy was remanded for sentencing following his guilty pleas.

In a separate proceeding, Murphy attempted to halt the criminal prosecution by claiming that a 2015 settlement agreement with the Revenue Commissioners precluded further legal action. However, in May 2022, the High Court dismissed his application, allowing the prosecution to proceed.

Additionally, in September 2024, Murphy appeared on the Revenue Commissioners’ tax defaulters list, having made a settlement of €845,343 for under-declaration of income tax. This settlement comprised €419,724 in tax, €110,826 in interest, and €314,793 in penalties.

These incidents highlight a series of serious tax-related offenses committed by Brian Murphy during his tenure as a director and consultant.

Analyzing the Fake Copyright Notice(s)

Our team collects and analyses fraudulent copyright takedown requests, legal complaints, and other efforts to remove critical information from the internet. Through our investigative reporting, we examine the prevalence and operation of an organized censorship industry, predominantly funded by criminal entities, oligarchs, and disreputable businesses or individuals. Our findings allow internet users to gain insight into these censorship schemes’ sources, methods, and underlying objectives.

What was Brian Murphy - Deloitte County Cork trying to hide?

Brian Murphy – Deloitte County Cork‘s attempts to hide unfavourable content through the misuse of copyright notices while allegedly engaging in perjury present serious legal concerns. These actions suggest a calculated attempt to manipulate legal systems to suppress free speech, a fundamental violation of copyright law principles and an abuse of legal processes. The use of such tactics not only undermines the integrity of copyright protection but also potentially constitutes perjury, further entangling Brian Murphy – Deloitte County Cork in legal accountability. Let’s examine the information Brian Murphy – Deloitte County Cork may be trying to remove from the internet –

Investigative Report: Brian Murphy – Deloitte, County Cork

Introduction: Brian Murphy, a former senior executive at Deloitte’s Cork office and director of Securemed Limited, has been at the center of numerous allegations and legal battles spanning more than a decade. His involvement in tax fraud, controversies related to professional ethics, and subsequent court proceedings have drawn significant public attention. This report delves into the details of Murphy’s career trajectory, the allegations against him, legal proceedings, and the broader implications of his actions.

Career Overview and Context:

Brian Murphy was a prominent figure in Deloitte’s Cork office, holding a senior position that established him as a trusted advisor to clients. His role extended beyond Deloitte to directorships in various companies, including Securemed Limited. Known for his expertise in tax and financial consultancy, his reputation took a sharp downturn when his professional actions came under scrutiny.

The VAT and Income Tax Fraud Case:

Background of the Case: Murphy’s directorship at Securemed Limited placed him at the center of fraudulent tax filings that triggered investigations by Ireland’s Revenue Commissioners. Between 2008 and 2012, Murphy orchestrated schemes to evade tax obligations, leading to incorrect filings of VAT and income tax returns.

Key Offenses:

1. VAT Fraud:
   • Murphy knowingly submitted incorrect VAT returns for Securemed Limited during three specific periods:
     • January–February 2011
     • July–August 2011
     • January–February 2012
   • These fraudulent filings sought to claim VAT refunds improperly, depriving the Irish tax authorities of rightful revenue.
2. Income Tax Fraud:
   • Murphy filed inaccurate personal income tax returns for the years 2008 and 2009, reflecting a clear intention to underreport his earnings.

Extent of Fraud: The combined loss to the Irish Exchequer exceeded €120,000, a significant figure that underscored the systematic nature of his actions.

Legal Proceedings:

Criminal Charges and Court Hearings:

• In February 2014, the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) initiated criminal proceedings against Murphy. This culminated in his appearance before Cork Circuit Criminal Court in October 2023.
• Murphy pleaded guilty to multiple counts of tax fraud, acknowledging his role in the deliberate misrepresentation of tax filings.

Sentencing and Legal Arguments:

• Sentencing was postponed following his guilty plea, with the court considering the severity of his actions.
• Murphy attempted to dismiss the case by arguing that a 2015 settlement with the Revenue Commissioners precluded criminal prosecution. This defense was rejected by the High Court in May 2022.

Tax Settlement and Public Disclosures:

Revenue Commissioners’ Tax Defaulters List:

• In September 2024, Murphy’s name appeared on the tax defaulters list after he agreed to a settlement totaling €845,343. The settlement included:
  • €419,724 in unpaid taxes
  • €110,826 in accrued interest
  • €314,793 in penalties
• This settlement reflected under-declared income tax spanning several years.

Professional and Public Repercussions:

Reputation Damage:

• The allegations and subsequent admissions of guilt severely tarnished Murphy’s professional standing. As a former partner at Deloitte, an organization known for its strict adherence to ethical and professional standards, Murphy’s actions were a significant departure from the expectations of his role.

Impact on Deloitte:

• Although Deloitte was not implicated in Murphy’s fraudulent activities, the association of a former senior partner with criminal tax offenses raised questions about internal oversight mechanisms.

Analysis of Ethical Breaches:

Murphy’s case highlights several ethical violations:

1. Breach of Fiduciary Duty:
   • As a tax consultant and company director, Murphy’s actions betrayed the trust placed in him by clients, colleagues, and regulatory authorities.
2. Conflict of Interest:
   • His dual role as a Deloitte executive and a company director may have created conflicting loyalties, contributing to unethical decision-making.
3. Evasion of Accountability:
   • His attempt to block prosecution through legal technicalities suggests a reluctance to take responsibility for his actions.

Public and Legal Commentary:

Criticism from Regulatory Authorities:

• Revenue Commissioners have publicly emphasized the importance of holding high-profile individuals accountable for tax compliance. Murphy’s case was portrayed as a deterrent to similar actions by others.

Media Scrutiny:

• National media outlets, including The Irish Times and BreakingNews.ie, extensively covered the proceedings, highlighting the broader implications of his offenses for Ireland’s tax system and corporate ethics.

Conclusion:

Brian Murphy’s fall from grace is a cautionary tale about the consequences of unethical behavior, even for individuals in positions of authority and trust. While his professional contributions at Deloitte once reflected expertise and competence, his involvement in systematic tax fraud undermined his legacy and damaged public trust in the institutions he represented.

Key Takeaways:

• The case underscores the importance of rigorous regulatory oversight and transparency in corporate governance.
• It highlights the need for ethical vigilance among professionals handling financial and tax-related matters.
• Murphy’s actions serve as a reminder that no individual is above the law, regardless of their professional stature.

Murphy’s sentencing, alongside his publicized tax settlement, marks the culmination of a years-long saga. The broader implications for Ireland’s corporate and financial landscape remain a topic of ongoing debate.

How do we counteract this malpractice?

Once we ascertain the involvement of Brian Murphy – Deloitte County Cork (or actors working on behalf of Brian Murphy – Deloitte County Cork), we will inform Brian Murphy – Deloitte County Cork of our findings via Electronic Mail.

Our preliminary assessment suggests that Brian Murphy – Deloitte County Cork may have engaged a third-party reputation management agency or expert, which, either independently or under direct authorization from Brian Murphy – Deloitte County Cork, initiated efforts to remove adverse online content, including potentially fraudulent DMCA takedown requests. We will extend an opportunity to Brian Murphy – Deloitte County Cork to provide details regarding their communications with the agency or expert, as well as the identification of the individual(s) responsible for executing these false DMCA notices.

Failure to respond in a timely manner will necessitate a reassessment of our initial assumptions. In such an event, we will be compelled to take appropriate legal action to rectify the unlawful conduct and take the following steps –

Since Brian Murphy – Deloitte County Cork made such efforts to hide something online, it seems fit to ensure that this article and sensitive information targeted online by these events get a lot more exposure and traffic than what it would have received originally

We hope this becomes an excellent case study for the Streisand effect…The key idea behind the Streisand effect is that efforts to restrict information can backfire, often causing the information to gain more attention than it would have otherwise. This effect is widespread in the digital age, where users quickly notice and spread censorship efforts on social media and other platforms. Trying to suppress something can unintentionally lead to it becoming more visible, which Brian Murphy – Deloitte County Cork is finding out the hard way.

Potential Consequences for Brian Murphy - Deloitte County Cork

Under Florida Statute 831.01, the crime of Forgery is committed when a person falsifies, alters, counterfeits, or forges a document that carries “legal efficacy” with the intent to injure or defraud another person or entity.

Forging a document is considered a white-collar crime. It involves altering, changing, or modifying a document to deceive another person. It can also include passing along copies of documents that are known to be false. In many states in the US, falsifying a document is a crime punishable as a felony.

Additionally, under most laws, “fraud on the court” is where “a party has sentiently set in motion some unconscionable scheme calculated to interfere with the judicial system’s ability impartially to adjudicate a matter by improperly influencing the trier of fact or unfairly hampering the presentation of the opposing party’s claim or defense.”  Cox v. Burke, 706 So. 2d 43, 46 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (quoting Aoude v. Mobil Oil Corp., 892 F.2d 1115, 1118 (1st Cir. 1989)).

Is Brian Murphy - Deloitte County Cork Committing a Cyber Crime?

Yes, it seems so. Brian Murphy – Deloitte County Cork used multiple approaches to remove unwanted material from review sites and Google’s search results. Thanks to protections allowing freedom of speech in the United States, there are very few legal ways to do this. Brian Murphy – Deloitte County Cork could not eliminate negative reviews or search results that linked to them without a valid claim of defamation, copyright infringement, or some other clear breach of the law.

Faced with these limitations, some companies like Brian Murphy – Deloitte County Cork have gone to extreme lengths to fraudulently claim copyright ownership over a negative review in the hopes of taking it down.

Fake DMCA notices have targeted articles highlighting the criminal activity of prominent people to hide their illegal behavior. These people, which include US, Russian, and Khazakstani politicians as well as members from elite circles including the mafia and those with massive financial power, are all connected – and alleged corruption ranging from child abuse to sexual harassment is exposed when exploring evidence found at these URLs. It appears there’s a disturbing level of influence being exerted here that needs further investigation before justice can be served. Brian Murphy – Deloitte County Cork is certainly keeping interesting company here….

The DMCA takedown process requires that copyright owners submit a takedown notice to an ISP identifying the allegedly infringing content and declaring, under penalty of perjury, that they have a good faith belief that the content is infringing. The ISP must then promptly remove or disable access to the content. The alleged infringer can then submit a counter-notice, and if the copyright owner does not take legal action within 10 to 14 days, the ISP can restore the content.

Since these platforms are predominantly based in the U.S., the complaints are typically made under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), which requires online service providers and platforms to react immediately to reports or violations. Big Tech companies rarely have systems in place to assess the merit of each report. Instead, all bad actors need to do is clone a story, backdate it, and then demand the real thing be taken down.

Reputation Agency's Modus Operandi

The fake DMCA notices we found always use the “back-dated article” technique. With this technique, the wrongful notice sender (or copier) creates a copy of a “true original” article and back-dates it, creating a “fake original” article (a copy of the true original) that, at first glance, appears to have been published before the true original.

Then, based on the claim that this backdated article is the “original,” the scammers send a DMCA to the relevant online service providers (e.g. Google), alleging that the ‘true’ original is the copied or “infringing” article and that the copied article is the “original,” requesting the takedown of the ‘true’ original article. After sending the DMCA request, the person who sent the wrong notice takes down the fake original URL, likely to make sure that the article doesn’t stay online in any way. If the takedown notice is successful, the disappearance from the internet of information is most likely to be legitimate speech.

As an integral part of this scheme, the ‘reputation management’ company hired by Brian Murphy – Deloitte County Cork creates a website that purports to be a ‘news’ site. This site is designed to look legitimate at a glance, but any degree of scrutiny reveals it as the charade it is.

The company copies the ‘negative’ content and posts it “on the fake ‘news’ site, attributing it to a separate author,” then gives it “a false publication date on the ‘news’ website that predated the original publication.

The reputation company then sent Google a Digital Millennium Copyright Act notice claiming the original website infringed copyright. After a cursory examination of the fake news site, Google frequently accepts the notice and delists the content.

In committing numerous offences, Brian Murphy – Deloitte County Cork either premeditated actions or were unaware of the consequences. Despite hiring an agency to make Google disregard any negative information about Brian Murphy – Deloitte County Cork, ignorance does not excuse this wrongdoing.

Fake DMCA notices have targeted articles highlighting the criminal activity of prominent people to hide their illegal behavior. These people, which include US, Russian, and Khazakstani politicians as well as members from elite circles including the mafia and those with massive financial power, are all connected – and alleged corruption ranging from child abuse to sexual harassment is exposed when exploring evidence found at these URLs. It appears there’s a disturbing level of influence being exerted here that needs further investigation before justice can be served. FSMSmart is certainly keeping interesting company here.

The Reputation Laundering

Rogue Reputation agencies use spurious copyright claims and fake legal notices to remove and obscure articles linking clients to allegations of tax avoidance, corruption, and drug trafficking. Most of these reputation agencies are based offshore, mainly in Russia, India, and Eastern Europe, and they do not worry about complying with US-based laws.

The content in all of the articles for which the fraudulent DMCA notices have been sent relates to allegations of criminal allegations, including corruption, child abuse, sexual harassment, human trafficking and financial fraud against businesses and individuals with ultra-high net worth.

In addition to the misuse of the DMCA takedown process, there is a notable absence of enforcement concerning perjury violations. The statutory requirement related to perjury is designed to deter copyright holders from submitting fraudulent or knowingly false takedown requests, as they may face legal consequences for making false declarations under penalty of perjury. However, to date, there have been no known instances of any individual being prosecuted for perjury in connection with the submission of false DMCA takedown notices.

This lack of enforcement has emboldened copyright holders to exploit the DMCA takedown process to suppress dissent, criticism, or other unfavorable content, without fear of legal repercussions.

Some of the people and businesses who have employed this tactic to remove legitimate content from Google illegally include a Spanish businessman-turned-cocaine-trafficker, Organised crime, an Israeli-Argentine banker accused of laundering money for Hugo Chávez’s regime, a French “responsible” mining company accused of tax evasion, child molesters and sexual predators. Brian Murphy – Deloitte County Cork is in great company ….

What else is Brian Murphy - Deloitte County Cork hiding?

We encourage you to ‘Dork‘ Google by searching for keyword combinations such as [Brian Murphy – Deloitte County Cork] + {Negative Keyword, such as Scam, Fraud, Complaints, Lawsuit, Sanction, etc} on Google. It’s likely if you scroll down to the bottom of this Google search results, you’ll stumble upon this Legal Takedown notice (pictured below)

To make such an investigation possible, we encourage more online service providers to come forward and share copies of content removal requests with industry experts and researchers. If you have any information on Brian Murphy – Deloitte County Cork that you want to share with experts and journalists, kindly email the author directly at [email protected].

All communications are strictly confidential and safeguarded under a comprehensive Whistleblower Policy, ensuring full protection and anonymity for individuals who provide information.