Michael Jennings accused of hiding assets to avoid paying ex wife $500k from rape trial

Former NRL star Michael Jennings is facing a financial crisis that could leave him unable to fund his appeal against a civil court decision that found him guilty of raping his ex-wife.

Former NRL star Michael Jennings has a financial crisis on his hands.

He owes ex-wife Kirra Wilden more than $500,000 after she successfully sued him in a civil case, where a judge ruled that he raped her during their marriage.

Now the former State of Origin flyer wants to borrow against his assets — which were frozen during the case — to pay his lawyers $150,000 to appeal against the decision.

But District Court Judge David Wilson won’t let him.

On Tuesday, Judge Wilson rejected the former Parramatta Eels centre’s bid to alter the freezing order on his estate so he could obtain the money by taking out a loan.

A judge has rejected former NRL star Michael Jennings bid to alter the freezing order on his estate.

Judge Wilson told the court he is highly suspicious of why Jennings gave $1.6 million to his other ex-partner and mother of his two children Kristen Harris, especially as the majority of the money was transferred while the case underway.

Judge Wilson told the court Jennings was trying to “dissipate” his assets to avoid paying Ms Wilden.

Giving evidence about the transfers, Jennings told the court he gave Ms Harris about $620,000 as a “separation agreement”.

The 34-year-old told the court he gave Ms Harris a further $1 million “to look after money and to use (it) for the benefit of our children’s future” and to repay her for renovating one of his properties, the court heard.

Jennings gave the money to Ms Harris after selling three of his investment properties between February 2020 and September 2021, the court heard.

He also borrowed $300,000 from Ms Harris in August 2021 and she paid about $220,000 to his lawyers the same month.

Michael Jennings owes ex-wife Kirra Wilden more than $500,000 Picture: Jeremy Piper

Ms Wilden argued against Jennings being able to borrow further on his assets.

Her lawyers told the court any further borrowing by Jennings “will substantially impact upon (Ms Wilden’s) ability to enforce the judgment of $490,091.05 plus costs”, which the ex-NRL player was ordered to pay her at the end of the trial in December 2021.

Judge Wilson told the court that — apart from the $600,000 paid to Ms Harris for the separation agreement — Jennings appeared to be moving assets in an attempt to avoid paying Ms Wilden.

“I find that the payment of money to Ms Harris … was done in order to dissipate or minimise (Jennings’s) assets in a transparent attempt to avoid satisfying the judgment made in favour of (Ms Wilden),” Judge Wilson told the court.

Judge Wilson also told the court that Jennings’s claim that the additional sum was paid to Ms Harris to look after their children was, to some degree, contradicted by the existence of the payments under separation agreement.

Michael Jennings says he wants to fight to clear his name. Picture: Jeremy Piper

It is a legal blow to Jennings, who told the court he wants to fight to clear his name.

And it leaves him in the position where he may not be able to fund his appeal.

Jennings last played for the Eels in 2020.

The court heard he is now working a job that pays him $45,000 — a world away from the estimated $600,000 a year he collected at the peak of his NRL career.

During the hearing, Judge Wilson — who presided over the trial — asked Jennings why he could not borrow some of the money from Ms Harris.

“What I don‘t understand is you’ve given your former partner $1.6 million … Surely you can call back a sum of money from her?” Judge Wilson said.

Jennings replied: “Yeah, well before your Honour did make a decision, I was confident that I was and I‘m still confident now that I was innocent”.

“I believed that I was going to win the case and I didn‘t think I was going to be in this situation of (funding an appeal) … so I didn’t think about trying to save money,” Jennings said.

Jennings told the court he would have to provide Ms Harris with security to borrow money from her but hadn’t asked her for a loan.