The widow of slain gangster ‘Fat’ Andy Connors has been given one more chance to get rid of illegal homes on her site - or face jail. Ann Connors was given a final lifeline on Friday when Dublin’s Circuit Civil Court heard she now had legal representation in court, who wanted to have a conversation with her to make progress in the long-standing legal battle.
It comes after her previous appearance before the court last week - in which Connors was brought in via garda custody - after repeatedly ignoring court orders to get rid of chalets and mobile homes located on her site at ‘The Ranch’ in Saggart, Co Dublin.
This Friday Ms Connors was represented by a solicitor who said he was coming on record for her, which the court heard as a “positive development.” He told presiding Judge John O’Connor that he was “hoping to make significant progress” and that he hoped to “have a conversation with my client and her people over the next few days.”
Judge O’Connor told the solicitor that he would have to have a very “candid” conversation with his client as there was an “air of unreality” in court last week and the matter had already been previously litigated in the Circuit Court and the High Court.
The Judge said Ms Connors “still feels she has a right” to the mobile homes, for which she does not have planning permission, remaining on her property - and said she needs to be informed that she doesn’t. Judge Connors granted Ms Connors solicitor’s request for an adjournment on the matter until May 2nd - at which time he hopes to make progress.
Last week barrister Chris Hughes, counsel for South Dublin County Council, told the Judge that Connors was in breach of court orders directing her to remove two chalets and four mobile homes from the land.
On that occasion Ms Connors took the stand - and was asked by the State barrister if she remembers a planning injunction a number of years ago and a ruling that she did not have planning permission. “I paid the architect and my solicitors and they said everything was alright so I heard no more,” Ms Connors responded.
The Judge then informed Ms Connors that she was in breach of the court order, that she does not have planning permission and she is not in compliance with the law - asking her if she understood the consequences of that. Ms Connors said she did but claimed she had planning permission for her house and for her sheds.
Told about two chalet dwellings which are separate from her house, Ms Connors stated they were there for the past 12 years. The Judge then further informed her that she can be defensive if she wishes but “the consequences are going to prison” or she complies with the court.
Ms Connors was told she had illegal mobile homes and that the matter had been appealed to the High Court which affirmed the original order and this court - and that she has not complied with either. Ms Connors then went on to claim she did have planning permission - only for the Judge to tell her that she did not.
“No you don’t have planning permission and that’s the end of the matter. Both the Circuit Court and the High Court have determined that,” he said. The Judge told Ms Connors that she would have to comply with the order - to which she responded: “Yeah, it’s just that I won’t be able to put my kids out on the road either. Have you’s got houses to give my kids?”
The Judge told Ms Connors that she was in clear breach of court orders and said he did not want any more “smart remarks” from her. He told Ms Connors that if she did not comply she would be sent to prison.
“How long will I do in prison?” Ms Connors responded, to which the Judge said “Until its removed.”
“You had your chance, you're already way in breach - that means that its not a question of how long…you must do this immediately,” he said.
Ms Connors said she was after swearing on the Bible and therefore would not lie - but said she would have to talk to her family first before removing the illegal homes.
The Judge gave Connors a week to progress plans to remove the sites, deemed her to be served, and told her to return to a sitting of the court next Friday. Ms Connors further objected and stated that she has people living in the illegal properties and “can’t just put them out overnight.”
“It’s not a question of overnight. You are in breach of court orders,” the Judge responded, telling Connors she had until next Friday, April 11, to sort her affairs.
Following the case Ms Connors spoke to this paper - and claimed she would likely take the matter all the way to the Supreme Court. She also claimed that she was somehow being discriminated against because of who she is - and claimed she was willing to go to jail to keep the homes which she claimed some of her children were living in - and which she was also being paid rent for by other tenants.
“I don’t know what to do at the minute, that’s to be honest with you. For my children I would go to jail yeah I would. If they take my children's homes like I’ll go to prison, I don’t care.”
Connors revealed to us that about 30 people are living in the mobile homes - and that she makes money from some of them. “My income, what am I supposed to live on when this is gone?” she said.
“I’d say about 30 people (are living in the homes). See there's six of my kids living in most of them so I don’t make a lot. There’s families that the council wont house living in my properties. Most families come in and I don't charge them because they're from the travelling community,” she claimed.
Insisting she would not be able to get rid of the homes within the week timeframe she was given, Connors went on to claim she was being discriminated against because of her late husband - a notorious gangster.
“I was left a widow. A widow that never got a pension. Even the Queen of England gets a pension,” she said. “Left with six children, I’m a traveller person, and they want to put my children on the street now. Some of my kids is living in them homes. There’s seven or eight mobiles and I have two or three renters on top of that,” she said.
“I think I will take it to the Supreme Court because I do have all the right in the world. They are 12 years on the property. This is our culture, we are travellers like, you know?
Pointed out to her that the Circuit Court and High Court found that her properties are illegal, Connors doubled down. “What do you mean illegal? I bought and paid for them so how would they be illegal?
Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest news from the Irish Mirror direct to your inbox: Sign up here.
