Supreme Court allows sale of $1.4m mansion owned by Operation Ironside accused – with a catch

A $1.4 million mansion owned by an alleged Operation Ironside kingpin has been sold, but questions surround a mysterious payment of $350,000 labelled a “sham”.

The sale of a million-dollar mansion owned by an alleged bikie kingpin and tied up in the Operation Ironside assets battle has finally been approved.

But $350,000 from the sale intended for an associate of the accused has been sealed away in a trust as the Director of Public Prosecutions argues it was the result of a “sham” contract.

The $1.4 million eastern suburbs mansion was owned by a man alleged to be a major organised crime figure arrested as part of Operation Ironside, who cannot be named for legal reasons.

He is charged with multiple drug manufacturing and trafficking offences as well as possessing firearms and conspiracy to murder a fellow organised crime member in a drive-by shooting in Norwood.

The sale of the property, which is believed to have begun before the owner was arrested on June 7, was delayed by police seeking a restraining order on the accused’s interest in the house.

More than $30m worth of cars, homes, watches and cash allegedly linked to Operation Ironside is the subject of restraining order applications in South Australia’s courts, including this Audi Q8. Picture: SA Police

In an interlocutory application lodged with the Supreme Court last month, a female associate of the man asked for orders which would see the sale of the property go ahead and for the payment of a $350,000 debt she claimed to be owed.

The documents, released by the court, claim the woman entered into a contract to help the accused man purchase the mansion.

She invested $270,000 of a $570,000 insurance payout she had received following the arson of her home.

To secure her investment in the property, the woman took out a caveat over it, which would restrict the sale or refinancing of the house.

Her contract with the owner specified that she would ultimately receive a $350,000 payout.

Damian O’Leary SC, for the woman, argued in his written submissions that the only people opposing the sale of the property and the transfer of the cash was the DPP.

“The DPP has been asked on several occasions what their opposition to such a resolution is,” he wrote.

“The DPP has been unable to explain, sufficiently or at all, the basis for opposition other than submitting that the contract is a ‘sham’.

“(My client) has not been charged and is an innocent party in proceedings.”

During a hearing last week, a representative for the DPP said banking records showed money flowing from the man back to the associate.

“There is a real question about whether the interest as protected by the caveat is in the amount of $350,000, given what appears to be payments of $240,000 from (the accused) back to (the associate),” he said.

Supreme Court Justice Greg Parker ordered the sale of the house be finalised.

But he did not decide the fate of the $350,000. Justice Parker ordered the funds be held in a trust account in the name of the woman’s lawyers while the debate continues.

The case will come back before court again this year.

Originally published as Supreme Court allows sale of $1.4m mansion owned by Operation Ironside accused – with a catch