R v L Schneider & J Pydde [2012] NSWDC 169

R v L Schneider & J Pydde [2012] NSWDC 169

The prosecution did not prove beyond reasonable doubt that the alleged deceptions were made or practised, that either accused acted dishonestly at the relevant time, or that the obtaining of the $140,000 cheque occurred in furtherance of a joint criminal enterprise. The evidence left reasonable possibilities consistent with a poorly documented high-interest investment or loan arrangement intended to assist financing the Missabotti purchase, and the key Crown witnesses were unreliable on important matters. Subsequent conduct, including use of funds and later documents, did not establish the alleged deceptions or dishonesty beyond reasonable doubt.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 June 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Judge Alone Trial; Verdict
Outcome
Each accused not guilty.
Legal Topics
['dishonestly Obtaining a Valuable Thing' 'deception' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'judge Alone Trial' 'proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt' 'circumstantial Evidence and Inferences']
['criminal Law'] ['dishonestly Obtaining a Valuable Thing' 'deception' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'judge Alone Trial' 'proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt' 'circumstantial Evidence and Inferences']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Judge Alone Trial; Verdict

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether each accused, by deception, dishonestly obtained a valuable thing, namely a bank cheque in the sum of $140,000, from Winifred McKercher.' 'Whether the alleged deceptions by words or conduct were made intentionally or recklessly on or before 1 May 2006.' 'Whether the accused acted dishonestly at the time the bank cheque was obtained.' 'Whether the accused were acting in furtherance of a joint criminal enterprise.' 'Whether the subsequent conduct of the accused proved the alleged deceptions or dishonesty beyond reasonable doubt.']

Ratio Decidendi

The prosecution did not prove beyond reasonable doubt that the alleged deceptions were made or practised, that either accused acted dishonestly at the relevant time, or that the obtaining of the $140,000 cheque occurred in furtherance of a joint criminal enterprise. The evidence left reasonable possibilities consistent with a poorly documented high-interest investment or loan arrangement intended to assist financing the Missabotti purchase, and the key Crown witnesses were unreliable on important matters. Subsequent conduct, including use of funds and later documents, did not establish the alleged deceptions or dishonesty beyond reasonable doubt.

Court Disposition

Each accused not guilty.

Orders

  • ['Verdict: Lindsay John Schneider not guilty.' 'Verdict: Joachim Gerhard Pydde not guilty.']