Obeids and Macdonald make bids for bail
|
Jailed former NSW MP Eddie Obeid and his two convicted co-conspirators have sought bail pending their appeals which may not be decided until 2023.
Lawyers for the ex-Labor powerbroker, his son Moses Obeid and his former ministerial colleague Ian Macdonald on Tuesday argued the case involved “special or exceptional” circumstances.
They also submitted they had “an arguable case” on appeal which will include a claim that Justice Elizabeth Fullerton’s verdict was unreasonable.
In October, she jailed Obeid for at least three years and 10 months, his son for at least three years, and Macdonald for at least five years and three months.
After a lengthy and complex Supreme Court trial without a jury, she had found them guilty of conspiring for Macdonald to engage in misconduct as a minister between 2007 and 2009.
The then resources minister was found to have breached his duties by providing confidential information to the Obeids over a coal exploration licence which delivered a $30 million windfall to their family.
On Tuesday in the NSW Supreme Court, lawyers for Obeid, 78, his son, 52, and Macdonald, 72, applied for bail while the Crown argued against it being granted.
The lawyers submitted the men weren’t a flight risk, citing compliance with their bail conditions for many years before they were convicted.
If the appeals were filed by March, they would be able to be heard by September, while – if not allowed almost on-the-spot – the judgment may take some months.
Bret Walker SC said there was “a real risk” his client Moses Obeid would serve more than half his minimum term if he was successful and not on bail.
He noted the appeal itself related to a judge-alone trial for an offence which was not the kind of case that frequently comes before the court.
“This case will be at least in some respects, the authority on these matters,” he said.
One challenge would relate to the judge’s finding that a conspiracy began no later than May 9, 2008.
And about when Moses Obeid was said to have known Macdonald knew about his family’s connection to the property “to which a nefarious benefit might flow”.
Macdonald’s barrister Philip Strickland SC said “the facts of the case raise difficult legal points about whether there was in fact a meeting of minds as at the 9th of May”.
His client also would have served a significant portion of his sentence if his appeal succeeded.
“It is not in the public interest that a person who otherwise poses no risk to the community will be incarcerated for a significant period of time when a court later finds he is not guilty of that offence.”
Eddie Obeid’s barrister April Francis said the trial judge had expressed a doubt about whether the evidence established her client was a participant.
But she later admitted into evidence, without analysis, a “compendium of representations” made by his co-accused.
The judge made a “critical error” by simply admitting “holus-bolus hearsay material”, Ms Francis said.
Justice Helen Wilson will deliver her decision on Friday.
