1 day ago
3
A former Brisbane financial adviser jailed for defrauding his clients of $6 million has made a bid for freedom, claiming his legal team was incompetent and his conviction was too harsh.
Ben Jayaweera represented himself in the Supreme Court in Brisbane on Wednesday, arguing that prosecutors had failed to properly investigate his case and that his legal counsel had not tendered necessary documents at trial.
Former financial adviser Ben Jayaweera was charged following an investigation by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission.
In August 2024, a jury found Jayaweera guilty of fraud after blowing $5.9 million from 12 of his clients on a failed abalone farm project without their knowledge between 2013 and 2015.
He was accused of encouraging six couples, many of whom were planning their retirement, to invest in a scheme called the Australian Diversified Sector Income Fund. The fund was operated by Growth Plus Financial Group, of which Jayaweera was the director.
He claimed the fund was investing in cash, property, shares and agriculture. But prosecutors said the only investment was a single project, an abalone farm in South Australia operated by entities Jayaweera controlled.
At sentencing, his offending was described as “brazen, gross and callous”, and “not only criminal but evil, demonstrating no remorse”.
At his bail application on Wednesday, Jayaweera told Justice Paul Freeburn he was aware he had been convicted twice by jury.
But he said his conviction was manifestly excessive, and his legal team had failed to tender documents he believed were necessary for his trial.
When asked by Freeburn what the documents were, Jayaweera answered: “The contract agreement for the purchase of certain projects and which the prosecution state is a single project in this case, but it is not a single project. It’s a number of projects.”
“My solicitor was asked to question a liquidator of my company, that’s in writing, and he actually did not do that.
“This is actually part of this incompetency that are part of my grounds.”
Jayaweera claimed the prosecution did “not do a proper investigation of this matter”.
The court heard Jayaweera had two years before he was eligible for parole, and had applied to the Court of Appeal regarding his second conviction.
Freeburn dismissed the application for bail, saying Jayaweera had failed to detail the new evidence, or how the investigation was conducted improperly or how the jury could have been misled.
Freeburn said the jury verdict must be respected.
“Mr Jayaweera deposes that there’s a possibility a reasonable jury would have acquitted him on new evidence combined with the evidence that was available.
“However, he has not identified what that new evidence is or how it would have undermined the verdict of the jury.”
Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.
Most Viewed in National
Loading
