Extradition
to Australia for alleged serial fraudster Martin James Mailley to face two
miilion dollars in fraud charges has been confirmed by the Court of Appeal
eight years after his arrest. Appeals
against extradition on health grounds were dismissed.
Mailley’s New Zealand birth was
registered as Martin James Mailley, but he also holds passports in the names
James Martin Caldwell, Martin James Craigie and Francis John Springhall. When arrested in Queensland for fraud he was
found to hold drivers licences in multiple names and more than 18 credit cards
in 12 different identities. His de facto
partner, Sabrina Nutarelli, pleaded guilty in Queensland to involvement in
credit card fraud, serving six months of a three year jail sentence. Mailley pleaded not guilty. He fled to New Zealand prior to trial, where
he now lives with Ms Nutarelli and their daughter.
The Court of Appeal was told Australian
police discovered hundreds of thousands of dollars under Mailley’s control had
been transferred to New Zealand bank accounts in the name of Mailley or his
family. Mailley was arrested in New
Zealand on an Australian warrant in July 2008.
There are streamlined procedures in the Extradition Act for trans-Tasman
extraditions. The District Court ordered
extradition in March 2008. Since then,
Mailley has delayed extradition with a series of appeals. He has been out of custody, on bail, since
December 2008.
Mailley applied to have his extradition
referred to the Minister of Justice on health grounds. The Minister has a discretion: extradition
may be delayed; or permitted subject to undertakings from the the extradition
country. The District Court refused
Mailley’s application. Evidence was given that 64 year old Mailley has a
significant personality disorder, suffering from bipolar affective
disorder. He is also affected by
obstructive sleep apnoea, suffers significant back pain, has heart disease and
was diagnosed last year as having a tumour on his neck, suspected to be a
secondary cancer spread from an unknown primary site. He had attempted suicide on previous occasions.
The Court of Appeal confirmed Mailley did
not have sufficient grounds to seek intervention by the Minister. Unfortunate though Mr Mailley’s health problems
are, the Court said, they are not out of the ordinary. There is no suggestion that the Australian
authorities are not capable of dealing with these problems and the associated
suicide risk, the Court added.
Mailley
v. District Court – Court of Appeal (23.03.16)
16.050