Senior public servant did not misuse his position to help his son, court finds

This article is more than 1 year old

This article is more than 1 year old

The former Australian Taxation Office deputy commissioner Michael Cranston has been found not guilty of misusing his position to help his son.

Cranston denied using information he obtained as a deputy commissioner, and exercising influence in the capacity of his role, with the intention of dishonestly obtaining a benefit for his son Adam.

The jury at New South Wales district court in Sydney returned not guilty verdicts on both counts on Friday after less than two days of deliberations.

The crown had told the jury in the three-week trial that Cranston, now 59, instructed a staff member to search for information on an audit after a request from Adam Cranston in 2017.

Peter Neil SC, during his opening address, said Cranston’s son had a commercial relationship with the subject of the audit, Simon Anquetil.

“(Michael Cranston) should have recused himself from that request immediately,” Neil said.

Instead, Cranston informed his son his co-worker could not access the protected information, the jury heard.

The prosecutor said the second charge involved an allegation that Adam Cranston again asked his father for help in relation to a company named Plutus Payroll, after the ATO issued orders which had the effect of freezing its accounts.

The crown case was that Cranston, who resigned from his post when he was charged in 2017, exercised his influence by contacting an assistant commissioner for help.

But Cranston told the jury that he was “very comfortable and confident” he did the right thing when his son contacted him for information for Anquetil, a business associate.

He said Adam came to him with a strongly worded tax office letter sent to Anquetil which Cranston believed indicated “an incorrect application of the law”.

He told his son: “I will try and get somebody to try and deal with it but I can’t get involved in any decision-making or any of the detail.”

Cranston said he was concerned about “the culture side of it” and wanted to know what area was treating taxpayers “like this”.

“All I wanted to find out was what area is it being done in,” he said. “I would never have got involved.”

Cranston’s barrister, David Staehli SC, said during his opening address that it would not be proven that his client “believed he had no right to make the contacts which he did”.

Cranston disputed that he “acted in any way dishonestly in relation to either of these charges”, Staehli said.