Pasquale Lanciana has launched an appeal against his convictions over the Richmond ‘road gang’ robbery

The mastermind behind one of Melbourne’s most infamous armed robberies claims he has suffered a “substantial miscarriage of justice”.

Pasquale ‘Percy No Mercy’ Lanciana wants his convictions set aside. Picture: Sarah Matray

The mastermind behind one of Melbourne’s most infamous armed robberies has launched an appeal in Victoria’s highest court to have his convictions set aside.

Pasquale “Percy No Mercy” Lanciana, 65, was convicted two years ago of the 1994 Richmond “road gang” robbery where five men posed as road workers to block an Armaguard van carrying $2.3m in cash from the Reserve Bank.

Two gun-wielding bandits used duplicated keys to hijack the van shortly after 10am on June 22, after the driver came to a stop to obey one of the crooks holding a slow down sign.

The armed robbers placed garbage bags over the guards’ heads before cuffing them together and driving to a nearby side street to dump them and the truck.

Lanciana was convicted of the 1994 Richmond “road gang” robbery. Picture: Hamish Blair

They then made off with the cash, which has never been found.

In May 2021, a jury found Lanciana guilty of armed robbery, false imprisonment and money laundering after agreeing with the Crown case the former champion kickboxer had either organised or participated in the daylight robbery – or both.

The damning verdict came almost two years after an earlier trial had ended in a hung jury.

He was sentenced in September 2021 to 14 years behind bars, with the judge noting the crime “might lend itself to comparisons to Hollywood movies”.

But Lanciana on Tuesday launched an appeal against his convictions in the Court of Appeal, claiming he suffered a “substantial miscarriage of justice”.

Lanciana was found guilty of armed robbery, false imprisonment and money laundering. Picture: Hamish Blair

The convicted robber, who appeared via video link from prison, is the only one to have been charged over the heist.

His barrister Tim Game argued the appeal relied on the jury not being given an “extended unanimity direction”, which would have ordered them to be unanimous about a particular matter, in addition to being in agreement about whether or not Lanciana was guilty.

Mr Game said it was unknown how many jurors may have found Lanciana guilty of organising the robbery versus participating in the robbery.

“You could have any number of jurors, say seven, find him guilty of being present but not organising and any number of jurors (find him) not present but organising,” he said.

But Justice David Beach said it did not seem to be a reasonable possibility that “some jurors could have concluded that he was present … but he had no involvement in the planning and the organisation”.

He said if Mr Game was right to argue a unanimity direction was required because some jurors convicted him on one basis, while others acquitted him on that basis, a retrial would have to be ordered.

But prosecutor Diana Piekusis argued this was not a case “where one theory may exculpate the alternative theory”.

“This is a case where the liability for either … being present at the scene of the armed robbery or organising, relies substantially on the same facts and the same evidence,” she said.

The court heard the prosecution at trial relied on multiple admissions made by Lanciana to a secret witness over a period of time that “he did it”, “he was involved in it” and “he organised it”.

Lanciana was seeking to appeal his sentence but that ground of appeal was abandoned.

Justices David Beach, Stephen McLeish and Maree Kennedy will deliver their judgment at a later date.