Queensland Police seek leave to appeal former Ipswich mayor Andrew Antoniolli’s successful appeal

Queensland Police have launched a legal bid to overturn Ipswich mayor Andrew Antoniolli’s successful appeal against fraud convictions.

Former Ipswich mayor Andrew Antoniolli leaving Brisbane Supreme Court after Queensland Police applied for leave to appeal his successful appeal against fraud convictions. Picture: John Gass

Former Ipswich mayor Andrew Antoniolli is embroiled in a fresh legal battle with the Queensland Police attempting to overturn his successful appeal against fraud convictions.

Antoniolli was found guilty of 12 counts of fraud and one of attempted fraud in 2019 relating to the misuse of $10,000 of council funds to purchase auction items at charity events.

But Ipswich District Court Judge Dennis Lynch QC acquitted Antoniolli on all offences in December 2020, finding the sentencing magistrate had erred in ignoring he did not acknowledge he had done anything wrong by bidding on charity auctions or supporting payments from the community fund.

Antoniolli is now facing a hearing in the Court of Appeal where the Queensland Police are seeking leave to appeal Judge Lynch’s decision.

Crown prosecutor Sarah Farnden on Thursday argued against the finding that Antoniolli believed the practice of purchasing items at charity auctions was a legitimate council donations policy, so long as he did not benefit personally.

Ms Farden said the judge’s finding that the practice was designed in council policy had led to the finding that the action was not dishonest. She argued the funds were in fact used contrary to policy and Antoniolli’s actions were dishonest.

Former Ipswich mayor Andrew Antoniolli leaving Brisbane Supreme Court on Thursday.Picture: John Gass

“This error ultimately lead to his honour’s conclusion that the respondent did not act dishonestly…and the consequence of that error resulted in the acquittal of the respondent,” Ms Farden said.

“Without that error, it is our submission that the appeal against the conviction would be dismissed.”

She said because Antoniolli was told by the CEO the method to go about purchasing the auction items was to provide false information to council, that had correctly fed into the original magistrate’s decision that the conduct was dishonest.

“The fact that others were doing it was meaningless to whether or not it was within policy,” she said.

Representing Antoniolli, Saul Holt QC argued that errors or material errors presented by the Crown were insufficient to justify the court to grant leave for an appeal.

“It is a fair way to characterise this appeal to say that it is a complaint essentially about matters of fact or reasoning made from a judgment order from a court,” he said.

“There would be something quite profound required before leave could be granted on that basis.”

Mr Holt said Antoniolli’s actions relating to the purchase of items with council funds, including not using the word auction while filing receipt documents, were “no more than a manifestation of complying with the senior instructions”.

Chief Justice Catherine Holmes reserved her decision.