The DPP takes over Tabcorp prosecution, then drops it
by Andrew W Scott
13 September 2007
Nicholas Cowdery, the NSW Director of Public Prosecutions, has just
made what could only be described as a bizarre decision. Mr Cowdery’s
decision will be heartily welcomed by Tabcorp and the NSW Labor Government,
but has devastated one Chris Fitzsimons.
Who's Chris Fitzsimons? He’s the former Chatswood solicitor who
wagered more than $10 million from 2002 to 2006, punting on horses while
utilising a credit betting facility extended to him by the NSW TAB.
He now faces bankruptcy, has lost his practice and owes more than $1
million to family and friends. The credit betting facility was continued
by Tabcorp after it took over the TAB in 2004.
“But isn’t credit betting illegal?” I hear you ask.
Yes, credit betting is banned in almost all spheres of gambling in Australia,
including at TAB Agencies throughout NSW. It is also against the stated
policy of the NSW Government. But in secret discussions in 2002 between
then Gaming Minister Richard Face and the TAB, the TAB cried poor and
said gaming tax revenue was under threat, unless it was able to offer
credit. Despite initial denials and then protestations of amnesia about
the matter, it is a matter of public record that Face caved in, authorising
credit betting on 2 Sep 2002 utilising a little known loophole in the
Totalizator Act.
The TAB then got to work, offering its shiny new credit facility to
some 350 “Special Account Customers”, including adman and
racing identity John Singleton. Chris Fitzsimons was also one of the
“special” who was offered credit betting. An internal information
paper for
the eyes of the TAB Board reported Ernst & Young had estimated
an increase in betting turnover of $10 million for just the
first 15 customers to be offered credit. Extrapolate that to 350 customers
and we are talking an extra $233 million a year in betting.
Within gambling circles credit betting is generally acknowledged as
a great way for gambling providers (and thus Governments, through gaming
taxes) to make more money, but it’s devastating to problem gamblers.
When a person bets with their own money, they can still come home with
an empty pocket, but at least they don’t come home with an unpayable
debt, and the terrible consequences that arise from that debt. Normally
a punter can’t instantly liquidate the family home and bet it
on a horse race in a moment of madness, but with credit betting any
such moment can lead to the loss of all assets, subsequent bankruptcy
and destroyed lives.
The TAB initially gave Fitzsimons credit of $5,000 a week. As Fitzsimons
continued to lose it offered him $10,000 a week, then $20,000 a week:

Fitzsimons claims they eventually said “tell us what you want
and we’ll give it to you”.

Fitzsimons claims a litany of illegal, deceptive and unconscionable
conduct by the TAB over the period in question, and has a mountain of
paperwork to support his claims.
As a result of this conduct, Fitzsimons wanted to commence criminal
proceedings against TAB Ltd and Tabcorp. He satisfied the Registrar
of the Downing Centre Local Court of the bona fides of the case, and
was allowed to prosecute 11 charges under the Crimes Act including
obtaining money or financial advantage by dishonest deception.
He wrote to the DPP on 6 August this year, requesting that Mr Cowdery
take over the prosecutions. Cowdery’s response was to ask Fitzsimons
for a brief, which was supplied. The case was then put on the DPP’s
court list for 27 September. Fitzsimons was delighted with the prospect
of the DPP taking over the prosecutions, as the DPP has investigative
powers not available to a private prosecutor, and would therefore be
likely to unearth further evidence of Tabcorp’s wrongdoing. Fitzsimons
offered to be interviewed and to assist the DPP in any way he could.
Imagine Fitzsimons’ shock then, when yesterday he received this
letter from the DPP:

The DPP has taken the extraordinary step of taking over the prosecution,
merely so that he can abandon it. The only reason given was “it
was considered there was no reasonable prospect of conviction.”
The DPP didn’t even bother to interview Fitzsimons or examine
all the evidence he had.
Fitzsimons is now out in the cold. The DPP’s decision means
he can no longer pursue the charges, and he has no avenue of appeal.
Fitzsimons practiced as a criminal solicitor for 35 years, so certainly
has the requisite skills to proceed. He was not wasting the Court’s
time, there was a mountain of evidence involved and a prima facie
case against the TAB. His right to proceed had already been confirmed
by Magistrate O’Shane in an earlier strike-out motion.
Mr Cowdery’s decision effectively gags Fitzsimons and suppresses
all the nasty detail that would have come out in Court about the secret
credit betting deal done between the NSW Government and the TAB.
Fitzsimons claims that the Attorney General has leaned on the DPP to
keep the matter quiet. While this may or may not be true, there is certainly
an appearance here that the DPP wants this matter buried, and buried
quickly. Why take over a case, just in order to ensure it was dropped?
While the story of ICAC’s uncovering a public housing official
taking bribes in the hundreds of dollars makes it to the papers, efforts
appear to be at foot to keep quiet more serious matters involving hundreds
of millions of dollars and the NSW Government itself.
Mr Cowdery, if there was no reasonable prospect of conviction, why
not let justice take its course? Why not allow the Court to make that
decision? Why go to such extraordinary lengths to keep this matter out
of the Courts and out of the media?
What is it that someone is trying to hide?
Were you offered or involved with credit betting by the NSW TAB,
probably in 2003 or 2004? If you were, I would love to hear from you.
Please email chris@blackJack-mAsters.com to get in contact with me.
© 2007 Andrew W Scott – Permission granted
to run this piece, only if the original author is acknowledged as Andrew
W Scott.