Convicted fraudster Clare Dacich claims police officer is out to get her, court

A woman duped women out of hundreds of dollars selling Louis Vuitton bags online has told a court the police officer who investigated the case is out to get her and is the reason she can’t get work.

A young mother convicted of fraud charges and desperate to get out of prison is only behind bars because a police officer is “obsessed with her”, a court has heard.

Clare Margaret Dacich, 29, appeared before the Supreme Court in Sydney via AVL on Tuesday applying to be released from prison despite serving just ten months of her 14 month sentence.

Dacich pleaded guilty of three charges of dishonestly obtain financial advantage or cause disadvantage by deception in February and was sentenced to the term of imprisonment.

Defence lawyer Leigh Johnson, who told the court she was representing Dacich on a pro bono basis, said her client regrets pleading guilty because she was not a fraudster.

Clare Margaret Dacich, 29, appeared before the Supreme Court in Sydney via AVL on Tuesday trying to leave prison after pleading guilty to fraud. Picture: Facebook

“The circumstances of each charge do not warrant a conviction,” Ms Johnson said.

Court documents reveal Dacich, of Rosemeadow, was in an on-and-off relationship with her partner Ian Perry for five years before separating in 2018, and then suggesting he access funds from his superannuation account to help pay off debts.

The couple fought for weeks over the phone, which was being legally recorded, before the mother-of-four took it upon herself to lodge an online application for a hardship claim in Australian Super for $2997.70 behind her former partner’s back.

More than a year later in January 2020, Dacich put up a Gumtree advertisement for a $600 Louis Vuitton Neverfull handbag under a false name and sold it to a victim who never received the bag or a refund.

The young mother then falsely sold either a Neverfull handbag or Neo Noe bag multiple times, duping many women out of hundreds of dollars, according to court documents.

When one woman never received the bag after paying $1300 she went to the police and was given Dacich’s address, where she demanded the bag from Dacich’s grandmother.

The victim was handed a dirty Neverfull bag in “poor condition”, according to court documents.

Ms Johnson told the court Australia Post had been at fault for the lost bags and said she would have told Dacich not to plead guilty to the charges in the Local Court.

An example of the Louis Vuitton Neverfull handbag advertised by Clare Margaret Dacich.

However, the 29-year-old took herself to Campbelltown Police Station in November and handed herself in where she was charged with three counts of dishonestly obtain financial advantage or cause disadvantage by deception. She was sentenced to 14 months behind bars.

Ms Johnson told the court Dacich has a history of fraud charges including in 2015, when she was buying prams online from China and selling them for a higher price but four got stuck at customs meaning she was unable to deliver them.

The court also heard Dacich has prior charges from 2016, where she searched online to make a personal loan in her grandmother’s name.

“None of these matters should have been guilty pleas and a proper reading about what had gone on should have prompted a rejection of the pleas from the magistrate,” Ms Johnson said.

Ms Johnson claims there had been no complaints against Dacich and all charges were only laid against the young mother because a police officer is “obsessed with her”.

“These were only found when that cop entered her home without a warrant,” Ms Johnson said.

“There’s an investigation into the officer in charge who by all accounts is obsessed with her.”

“She has followed her around, gone to every real estate agent and employer and told them she’s a criminal.”

Clare Dacich is trying to get out of prison. Picture: Facebook

Ms Johnson told the court an investigation into the allegations against the police officer has been launched by police and not as a result of Dacich’s complaints.

Justice Helen Wilson quickly put a stop to Ms Johnson’s claims as neither she or the Crown prosecutor had been served any evidence in relation to what she was saying.

The court heard Dacich has four children, only one of which is in her care, and is the provider for her mother, grandmother, younger brother and son who all live together.

However as neither her mother or grandmother have rental history, the court heard they are going to be evicted and have no place to live on Friday.

“She is a devoted mother who pleaded guilty on the basis where she didn’t think she would go to prison,” Ms Johnson said.

“The notice to vacate the premises has been served and her entire family will literally be homeless by Friday.”

Both Dacich’s mother and grandmother have applied for 44 rental properties and have not been accepted, the court heard.

“One has to wonder why the real estate agent doesn’t want her there anymore and if it’s to do with a cop,” the lawyer said.

The court heard the refusal of bail would be dire for both Dacich and her family with Ms Johnson saying her client is at a low-risk of reoffending.

Justice Wilson acknowledged the 29-year-old’s personal circumstances but said she could not accept the error by the police officer Ms Johnson claim the charges were made on.

“A handwritten document filed by Dacich alleges error in the decisions of a magistrate of the Local Court and a judge of the District Court who dismissed the appeal,” she said.

“The applicant is very concerned her family will be evicted from their home this week and will be homeless.”

Justice Wilson said there were “real difficulties” in determining her decision but said there was nothing before the court that permitted it to make a reasonable assessment.

“In circumstances where a Local Court magistrate has imposed a penalty and a District Court Judge said it was appropriate and would not interfere, it is difficult for this court to find there are reasonable prospects of success,” she said.

Justice Wilson said the application should not have been put before the court as not enough information had been filed and refused bail.