Malcolm Beattie. Photo / Greg Bowker
On the day of the verdicts his lawyer, Jonathan Eaton, QC, said he'd be "having a very close look at our entitlement to seeking some sort of contribution to the costs that have been incurred".
Eaton last Wednesday said he had "no doubt an application will be filed shortly".
Peter Connolly, one of the four men acquitted in the Digi-Tech SFO prosecution who shared in the $1.1 million payout, said from what he'd seen the SCF defendants had "a very good cause to pursue an application for costs".
While Connolly and his co-accused were acquitted in 2004, it was about four years later when the defendants saw any money.
Despite the wait, he said he was "thrilled" he pursued costs, though the payout didn't anywhere near cover what he spent on his defence.
"Why should I pay for an erroneous prosecution? The SFO got absolutely slammed about in our case ... they had made the decision to charge without properly looking into the case and, as the whole thing unfolded, it collapsed around their ears," Connolly said
The long wait chasing a payout was why Malcolm Beattie - found not guilty in an SFO case involving rescue helicopter charities - decided against pursuing costs in his case.
After his acquittal Beattie said he was told he could go after costs "because of the wrong and totally shocking charges" that were laid.
But he was also advised the SFO would stretch out the costs application process and that it could take up to three years to see a courtroom.
"They had such deep pockets that they could just kill us financially and we couldn't afford it and that was the reason it never went ahead," he said.
"We just decided 'bugger it, you know, let it go, move on'," Beattie said.
Asked if that would be his advice to the South Canterbury Finance defendants, Beattie said: "Oh yes. Unless they have huge, deep pockets".
"I'm not a lawyer but getting something into court would [take at] least two to three years and do people want that around their head?"
Not guilty
Digi-Tech
The Digi-Tech defendants - investment banker John Reid and his colleagues Peter Connolly, John Currie and Peter Russel - were each found not guilty on two counts of fraud. Reid, Currie and Russel were also cleared on various money laundering charges.
The SFO had argued the promoters of the tax avoidance scheme defrauded investors and Inland Revenue.
But the High Court said investors went into the Digi-Tech scheme for no proper commercial purpose except to lessen their tax bill, so there was no attempt to deceive them. The scheme offered tax-deductible expenses during its 10-year life with the bulk of the investment paid in the last year.
Up to 75 loss-attributable companies were set up by investors. Investors were to buy $1 million of shares over 10 years, but pay more than 80 per cent in the last year.
They took out insurance, with premiums mostly paid with tax-deductible borrowed money, guaranteeing the shares would be worth $3 million at the end of the period.
Rescue Helicopter
Wayne Porter, Peter Pharo, Malcolm Beattie and Stewart Romley were each charged with conspiracy to defraud the Auckland Rescue Helicopter Trust between 1997 and 2002. The trust runs the Westpac rescue helicopter out of Mechanics Bay on the Auckland waterfront.
They also faced one count each of conspiracy to defraud the ChildFlight Charitable Trust, which ran a fixed-wing aircraft service for children. The SFO alleged grants from gaming machines at five Auckland pubs were dishonestly returned to the pubs in the guise of "advertising costs". The jury took three hours to find all four not guilty on all charges.
