Top cop fights ex-Queensland mayor’s fraud acquittal

Queensland’s police commissioner has launched a legal challenge against the decision to acquit a former mayor of 13 fraud charges.

In 2018, former Ipswich mayor Andrew Antoniolli was accused of misusing more than $10,000 in Ipswich City Council community donations to buy items for charity.

Former Ipswich mayor Andrew Antoniolli leaves the Brisbane Supreme Court on Thursday.Credit: Toby Crockford

He was sentenced to six months’ jail, wholly suspended, and had a conviction recorded in a June 2019 trial, but was acquitted of 13 fraud charges and a breach of bail offence on appeal in December 2020.

During his 2019 trial, Mr Antoniolli testified he acted on the advice of two Ipswich council CEOs that councillors could buy charity auction items and record the costs as donations on council records.

The trial heard Mr Antoniolli never believed he had acted dishonestly and that he had acted within guidelines set by the two CEOs.

On Thursday, Queensland Police Commissioner Katarina Carroll applied for leave in the Supreme Court to appeal Mr Antoniolli’s acquittal.

The application put forward the case that Mr Antoniolli had acted dishonestly in his auction purchases and use of council funds, and that his actions breached Ipswich City Council policy.

Crown prosecutor Sarah Farnden told the Court of Appeal there was unchallenged evidence that Mr Antoniolli was told a method of how to bid on items and dishonestly get them approved by council.

“The nuance I’m trying to make is the nuance between [Mr Antoniolli] being told the procedure is legitimate and he is all right to do it, and the [original] magistrate’s finding that he was told to use false information,” she said.

“All under community donation policy the respondent [Mr Antoniolli] can do, is indicate to a community organisation he would like to support and donate to your organisation.

“An application is then required to be completed by the community organisation, the respondent then indicates his support for that, the community development grant delegation then assess it against the criteria and policy and procedure, and determine whether or not it should be paid.

“The difficulty with these transactions [bidding at auction] is that it can’t be ignored that an asset is in play and that those people in the financial delegation are purposefully never told about.”

In response, Mr Antoniolli’s barrister Saul Holt said there was no finding that the council CEOs conspired to advise Mr Antoniolli how to dishonestly get council to approve the purchase costs.

He also argued Mr Antoniolli was found to be “not outside” council policy in what he had done and the court had been presented with evidence that there was a “lack of clarity” in the council’s policy documents regarding community donations.