The Snitch: Western Sydney mum posts $10 bond to be released from prison

It’s not quite get out of jail free, but pretty close. A Western Sydney mother only had to post $10 bond after a successful appeal against her four year jail sentence. Don’t miss The Snitch.

How much should a battling mother pay to get out of jail after she won a court appeal against her sentence for rorting the government’s parenting payments to the tune of $113,000?

The answer is 10 bucks, according to a five-judge panel on the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal.

That’s all Western Sydney mother of two Clarisse Totaan was ordered to pay to secure her release, according to the CCA’s recently published judgment.

Totaan was sentenced to four years’ jail by judge Jennifer English in the District Court on March 12, 2021. This came after she pleaded guilty to a rort where she under-reported her earnings, which led her to receive parenting payments of just under $113,000 from the Department of Human Services over a six-year period up to 2019.

The court heard Totaan was the victim of a controlling and abusive partner and she had used the money to buy necessities for her children.

She appealed the sentence on the grounds that Judge English had not considered the impact the prison sentence would have on her children. The other ground was that the jail sentence was excessive.

The CCA found Totaan’s kids would suffer greatly with her behind bars and that greed was not a motivating factor to her theft.

Totaan, who had already served more than a year in jail, was resentenced and was to be released immediately if she could post money for a good behaviour bond.

But the question then was how much should the court order Totaan to lodge when they have just found that one of the primary reasons she committed the crime was to make ends meet for her children.

The answer the judges came up with was $10.

Taxing time for top judge

NSW Supreme Court judge Anthony Payne wants one thing for Christmas – and that is to wake up on Xmas Day with the knowledge that he will not have to sit through any more longwinded submissions from the barristers in the trial of accused tax thief Adam Cranston.

Sadly, it appears that he is not going to get his wish.

Supreme Court justice Anthony Payne

Cranston, the son of former ATO deputy commissioner Michael Cranston, is on trial accused of masterminding a $105m tax fraud.

He and the others on trial have pleaded not guilty.

The trial has been running since April and Justice Payne wants it done by Christmas. He has set an ambitious timetable to get it done.

The judge has told the parties the case will be sitting until Christmas Eve. He’s even given the parties an Outlook-style calendar timetable detailing how long the prosecution and defence lawyers can take with their closing arguments to the jury.

The one thing it doesn’t take into account is the old joke in the legal fraternity of lawyers wildly underestimating how long they will take to argue their case.

Adam Cranston is on trial after being accused of masterminding a multimillion-dollar tax fraud. Picture: AAP Image/Peter Rae

The rule of thumb is that if a lawyer tells a judge the estimated time length on their matter is three days, then it’s probably three weeks.

And Justice Payne’s plan doesn’t have that much wiggle room.

Plus, we’re told that disaster struck this week when a juror went down with Covid. “It’s going to cost them a week,” one source said. “No other juror wants to sit in a box with someone with Covid. There’s no way it’s finishing by Christmas.”

Bill stoush

Guess which high-profile person has gone to war with a Sydney lawyer. The lawyer represented a family member of the high-profile person who picked up the bill for the legal fees. But their eyes popped when they saw the bill.

We’re told the pair are now at war over the fees that the lawyer charged.

The case was fairly simple and was not a lengthy trial but the bill still managed to come in at about $250,000.

The pair have reportedly been at each others’ throats and the high-profile person has apparently sought an independent review of the breakdown of the bill via a costs assessment.

So watch this space.

Got a snitch? Contact [e-mail]