Sharee Becker: Jailed real estate agent appeals fraud conviction for rent-to-buy scheme

A real estate agent jailed for fraud over a rent-to-buy scheme targeting venerable people is back in court seeking to overturn her conviction.

Sheree Becker, 43, was jailed for three and a half years in November last year after a jury unanimously found her guilty on seven counts of fraud against the ANZ bank.

At the time, the Victorian County Court found she had targeted persons with “very limited financial means” and no hope of repaying their mortgage.

Acting as the agent for both the buyer and seller of properties, she was convicted of falsifying documents and inflating prices.
“I further find these seven crimes were an orchestrated attack on the banking system, irrespective of how complacent or negligent the banking practice,” Judge Michael McInerney said in sentencing.

“This was persistent, planned and sophisticated criminality.”

Wearing a white prison jumper, she appeared before the Victorian Court of Appeal on Thursday as her lawyer, Dermot Dann KC, argued her conviction to be overturned because of the “extraordinary” actions of the trial judge.

Taking the court through transcripts of the 22-day trial, Mr Dann pointed out numerous instances of Judge McInerney interjecting in the “messy” trial — a feature he said was “unusual”.

“The impression is the judge is involving himself in the prosecution’s case,” he said.

“Where is the line, where is it drawn between asking for clarification and pulling the prosecution case into shape.

“If the case isn’t prepared properly, isn’t understandable, they (the prosecution) have to wear that.

“Its submitted the conduct here of the trial was not only irregular, it was so irregular to amount to a fundamental departure of the normal processes of trial.”

He said Judge McInerney undermined or cast a shadow over Ms Becker’s defence and her “bona fides”.

Mr Dann said Judge McInerney further raised the “spectre of illegality” over her business model, which the prosecution had not sought to do.

Responding to the appeal, a crown prosecutor conceded the “high level of engagement” by Judge McInerney was unusual, but argued Ms Becker’s conviction was “inevitable”.

“This was a strong case supported by the documentary evidence,” she said.

She argued the interjections did not improve the prosecution’s case and created an environment of “overall confusion”.

“He was trying to understand what was being put by the prosecution and indeed explains away his interjections as being for the jury,” she said.

“It certainly reflects poorly on the prosecutor and the prosecution case … the interventions are trying to understand these documents and concepts.”

Justices Karin Emerton, Phillip Priest and Peter Kidd reserved their judgment and will hand down an decision at a later date.

“It could be the judge thought the prosecutor was inept and bumbling and wanted clarity,” Justice Priest said.

“Another way was he thought the prosecutor was inept and bumbling and wanted to put the case correctly himself … it’s certainly unusual for this level of intervention.”

ncG1vNJzZmivp6x7r7HWrGWcp51jrrZ7zZqroqeelrlwwsicq6iqmZZ8pLvUq6usZZyWxHC%2Fx5qpnp1dl7Kkt8SrZKOZmaGypXnRnpilZZWowaLAxGaYoJ2eqXqivM%2BemKWrXZu%2FosHDZpqopqaesLW1zqdkn6eiYr%2BmutOtpputqWLApLTEppxoppWswG6%2F06ipsmeVarF0fZiabp9tkWeCeoWTaZlvbZaahnh%2FxGxobmiUbg%3D%3D