£200k second-hand clothing fraud trial falls apart

Tuesday 08 October 2019

The trial against a businesswoman accused of a £200,000 fraud through her second-hand clothes firm has fallen apart 11 days in, after it emerged that there was "no evidence" to support the key claim against her.

The Royal Court this morning directed a jury of eight men and three women to return a 'not guilty' verdict on all nine charges of fraudulent conversion against Lincolnshire-born Michelle Yuksel.

The prosecution had alleged that Ms Yuksel had cheated people in developing countries out of thousands by taking "very large" deposits for orders for used clothing that she never fulfilled in order to plug business and personal debts between 2010 and 2013.

But the claims crumbled yesterday when - more than halfway into the trial - it emerged that there was "no evidence" underpinning the allegations against her.

As the prosecution's case concluded yesterday, defence lawyer Advocate Ian Jones rose to argue that there was no case to answer.

Explaining his assessment, he told Court that “essential elements of the charges had not been laid out".

Pictured: Advocate Ian Jones argued there was no case to answer in the tenth day of the trial.

The submission brought proceedings to a sudden halt, with the Deputy Bailiff, Tim Le Cocq, pausing the trial to consider the submissions. This morning, he announced that he agree with Advocate Jones' view.

Speaking to the jury, the Deputy Bailiff explained that the prosecution had to prove "every element" of a charge of fraudulent conversion.

In the case against Ms Yuksel, he said the prosecution had failed to prove that when customers had paid her business, Parisma, they had entrusted the company to use their money for a “specified purpose".

“I have accepted the submission that there is no evidence that the money was specifically entrusted for a purpose,” the Deputy Bailiff said. 

He added that while customers had paid for goods, there was no evidence that “any specific sums had to be used to a specific purpose”.

Pictured: The Deputy Bailiff, Tim Le Cocq, directed the jury to return a not guilty verdict.

The Deputy Bailiff said that this may give rise to a contractual claim, but it did not prove “the key element of the charge".

He therefore concluded that there was no case to answer in relation to the charges and directed the jury to return a 'not guilty' verdict on all of the charges.

Ms Yuskel was subsequently discharged from the prosecution. 

Before discharging the jury, the Deputy Bailiff thanked them for their service during what he described as two “challenging” weeks. “Do not consider the time you have spent here wasted,” he said, adding that it was essential for the evidence to come out in court.

“You have fulfilled your public duties,” he concluded, adding he was “extremely grateful” to the jury for their service.