The Snitch: High-profile businessman’s daughter has brush with drug squad

THE SNITCH: The daughter of a rich Australian businessman has found herself caught up in a drug investigation after partying with cocaine dealer Matthew Doyle.

The daughter of a mega-rich Australian businessman has unknowingly found herself in the crosshairs of a drug investigation while partying with eastern suburbs cocaine dealer Matthew Doyle.

Now Doyle has been jailed, Snitch can reveal the high-profile woman’s brush with the law inside a hotel room.

Matthew James Doyle and his wife Kelsea. Picture: Facebook

Doyle — then a target of a major drug investigation — was in Melbourne for a bucks’ party with friends while police had him under surveillance before his wedding day in 2018. The party carried on inside a hotel room, which had been fitted with listening devices.

Investigators were intrigued to hear a familiar female voice on the recordings. The woman moved in the same social circles as Doyle and his soon-to-be-wife Kelsea, and was joyously involved in the celebrations.

The woman, who will remain unnamed, was probably captured on CCTV entering the hotel. But when police made inquiries with security about the footage, apparently the hotel system had technical difficulties.

Lucky for the woman in question, investigators had bigger fish to fry.

Doyle was sentenced in September this year to a maximum eight years’ jail after pleading guilty to supplying 50kg of cocaine.

His wife Kelsea has not been accused of any wrongdoing.

RACE HATE?

Stipe “Stephen” Lozina shocked the state when he attacked heavily pregnant Rana Elasmar in Parramatta last year while yelling anti-Muslim slurs.

He was also charged with intimidation after verbally abusing two Muslim women at Westfield Liverpool two weeks earlier. It sounded like a clear-cut case of a race or religious-based hate crime.

Rana Elasmar was heavily pregnant with baby Zayn when she was attacked by Stipe ‘Stephen’ Lozina. Picture: Sam Ruttyn

Yet Lozina was not charged over the Liverpool incident with offences under section 93Z of the NSW Crimes Act, which allows for charges for inciting violence on the grounds of race or religion. Instead, the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions elected to charge him with two charges of intimidation.

Why? Well, on Friday Attorney-General Mark Speakman said the ODPP deemed it more appropriate to charge Lozina — who pleaded guilty — with intimidation because it has a higher maximum penalty than under Section 93Z.

“These offences covered the same conduct,” he said.

Which begs the question: Would there ever be a situation where inciting violence on racial or other grounds ever not be classified as intimidation?

If so, then what is the point of Section 93Z? Might be time for a rethink.

Got a Snitch? Contact [e-mail] or [e-mail]