Surely not? Oh, yes, Reader....
Danielle Longstaffe was spared prison last December because she was pregnant, after defrauding her firm out of huge sums.
'Pleading ones belly' is alive and well in 2025...
At the time, Newcastle Crown Court heard the fraud was to the value of £370,000. Now, at a Proceeds of Crime Act hearing, it was said the benefit figure was £920,285.20p. Her "available amount" was £221,818,50, which she must pay back within three months or face two years in prison in default.
Why only part of it?
At her sentencing hearing, the court heard she carried out the fraud because she was being chased by loan sharks.
Ah, because presumably they have the rest of it, and since loansharking isn't illegal, cannot be persued for it.
A judge said he had to have regard to Longstaffe's unborn child while sentencing her and she avoided the prospect of having to give birth in prison when she got a suspended sentence.
Which will become a jail sentence when she fails to pay it back. Because we all know she will.
1 comment:
I have to ask.
Did she have signs of pregnancy, or did she have a certificate of pregnancy from her GP, or did the court simply accept what she told them? Perhaps thieves steal, but never lie?
Also, did she own a property or a car? Send the bailiffs in. If pregnant, she can live with the child's father, if she knows who he is.
Penseivat
Post a Comment