Court throws out fraudster's appeal

MATT NIPPERT
Last updated 05:00 21/06/2014
Loizos Michaels

LOIZOS MICHAELS: Fraudster's appeal was thrown out

Relevant offers

Money

New Zealand's top online banking mistakes and how to avoid them Couple owing $81,000 to the council threatened with bankruptcy How to get value for money from your health insurance Corelogic data shows more people are buying houses without partners New survey compares credit card reward schemes Europe Central Bank to halt production of €500 bills amid fears it's popular with crooks If you are taking financial risks, you should have a safety net ready Denise Cherelle Greig admits scamming three elderly women in Christchurch Woman arrested at Sydney Airport over alleged A$4.6m fraud due to banking error: police KiwiSaver schemes face fees backlash from customers whose balances fall short

Notorious fraudster and conman Loizos Michaels has had his appeal against conviction dismissed.

Cypriot-born Michaels' schemes, including duping All Black legend Jonah Lomu and extracting hundreds of thousands of dollars out of National Party president Peter Goodfellow, saw him convicted and sentenced to eight years in prison in 2012.

Michaels had gone to the Court of Appeal seeking to have his conviction for more than $3 million of fraud overturned, or the length of his sentence reduced, especially a three-year and nine-month minimum non-parole period.

Justices Rhys Harrison, Ronald Young and Simon France characterised Michaels' schemes as an "elaborate hoax" and a "sustained, ever-developing, con".

At his trial in the Auckland District Court, Michaels had relied on wild claims of a giant conspiracy for his defence, the Court of Appeal noted. It said this was a difficult line to pursue.

"It was on its face an unlikely explanation which needed buttressing by allegations of a grand scale conspiracy by the Serious Fraud Office in which not only its officers, but a large pool of witnesses were complicit," the judgment said.

Michaels claimed his lawyer, Peter Kaye, was riven by conflicts and had provided him an inadequate defence.

To support this claim Michaels submitted that Kaye's daughter, Nikki Kaye, was a National Party MP and this created a conflict given Goodfellow was a witness for the Crown. The Court of Appeal rejected this argument, along with others claiming Kaye failed to call witnesses and was insufficiently prepared.

The Court of Appeal also rejected claims the sentence was excessive. "The sustained level of creative endeavour marks this case out and also suggests Michaels presents a significant ongoing risk. He is plainly capable of fooling people and exhibits no remorse," the judgment said. 

Ad Feedback

- Stuff

Special offers

Featured Promotions

Sponsored Content