Why it took almost a decade to prosecute a state MP

Troy Bell could not wipe the smile from his face when he entered the South Australian political arena after a successful career in education.

It was March 2014 when the then-40-year-old Liberal snared the seat of Mount Gambier with an impressive 7.7 per cent swing, entering politics under Steven Marshall in opposition.

He swore an oath to represent his South-East constituents in Parliament – unaware he was under investigation by the Office of Public Integrity for stealing taxpayer funds.

Before becoming an MP, Bell helped establish and run the Independent Learning Centre (ILC)  – funded by the Education Department – to get vulnerable, at risk kids re-engaged with school.

It was a cause he championed after working as a teacher and had great success.

But he was soon under investigation for siphoning money meant for the ILC, which would have eventually benefited non-for-profit education organisations in the south-east region.

The crux of the complaint was that money never made its way to those organisations, lining Bell’s pocket instead.

It was also investigated by the department and the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption (ICAC), who executed a search warrant of Bell’s family home and compelled his wife to be interviewed during its three-year probe.

In May 2017, the ICAC file hit the desk of prosecutors.

Court documents reveal the deputy ICAC found the complaint “raised potential issues of corruption in public administration”.

It took three months for then-Director of Public Prosecutions Adam Kimber to charge Bell with 20 counts of theft and six counts of dishonest dealings with documents.

Bell expressed his intention to fight the charges, labelling the allegations a “political witch-hunt”.

He immediately resigned from the Liberal party and continued as an independent.

“I feel sick to my stomach, and I am in a state of shock and disbelief,” Bell said in a statement at the time.

“I am not going to run and hide from this; I think the people of Mount Gambier would be disappointed if their member cut and run as soon as the going got tough.”

Anyone facing criminal charges has the right to defend themselves to the extent of the law.

In the seven years it took to prosecute Bell, he earned almost $1.5 million in wages sitting on the backbench after retaining his seat in the 2018 and 2022 elections.

And after unanimous changes to the ICAC Act in 2021, theft and dishonesty charges no longer amount to corruption, meaning Bell is entitled to get reimbursed for his legal fees using taxpayer money, even if guilty of stealing it.

Any reimbursement must be signed off by the Solicitor-General and Attorney-General and must not exceed a daily rate of $4,000 for senior counsel.

The case – initially reported as a $2 million misappropriation — has been plagued by delays in the District Court. 

Most applications were mounted, and lost, by Bell and his defence team.

As Judge Simon Stretton pointed out in one Bell judgement, the passage of time causes memories to fade, and increases any potential forensic disadvantage to Bell.

“The process of justice becomes less and less timely,” Judge Stretton said.

“As all this time passes, there will be mounting practical challenges and difficulties, where 93 witnesses are being held in abeyance on subpoena month after month.”

His first trial was vacated after the death of barrister and former District Court judge Mark Griffin, who fell ill with terminal cancer in 2019.

For most of his court fight, Bell was represented by high-profile silk Marie Shaw KC, who launched dozens of applications on his behalf.

One application for a permanent stay – which if won, meant Bell would never face trial – centred on ICAC investigation failures. 

He twice lost his stay bid in SA courts before taking it to the High Court.

Bell’s lawyers withdrew his appeal to Australia’s highest court, but it had already caused a delay to his February 2022 trial.

Other applications revolved around DPP failures to disclose, fights over evidence relevance, whether a judge or jury should decide his case and an attempt to sever the charges so he would face six separate trials instead of one.

Court documents reveal prosecutors complained about the defence team filing significant applications without notice on the eve of hearings.

In March 2023, Bell’s defence team sought another delay on the grounds the DPP had failed to hand over hundreds of ICAC documents. Arguments were heard over three days.

But, Judge Stretton found most of the documents sought by defence had already been provided to them, dismissing the application.

“It is unfortunate that in each of the above three instances the defence failed to check whether in fact they had any of these documents, prior to claiming that they did not have them,” Judge Stretton said.

Mrs Shaw and her instructing solicitors withdrew from the case last August, leaving Bell unrepresented.

At that time, there were several outstanding defence applications which the District Court described as “some overlapping, some repeated and some entirely new”.

Bell hired new solicitors and a new barrister, Nicholas Healy, who dropped most of those applications, only proceeding with a bid to exclude a covert recording, citing legal professional privilege.

That recording was a phone call between Bell and former Liberal leader Isobel Redmond, where he admitted transferring money to his personal account “which I’ll have to defend”.

“I think I’m going to need a pretty good lawyer,” Bell told Ms Redmond in the recorded call.

Bell lost that case too, with Judge Stretton finding Ms Redmond was not a practising lawyer at the time.

It paved the way for his three-month trial to start in June, with a District Court jury delivering its verdicts on Thursday night, finding Bell guilty of 25 of the 26 charges.

During the trial, the court heard Bell failed to return $436,023.24, which prosecutor Jemma Litster said was a “conservative calculation” of the amount stolen.

She said the money was transferred into his personal accounts, allowing him to use the money for his own purposes including to pay credit card debts, offset his mortgage and for property investments.

Ms Litster had told the jury Mr Bell was able to commit the fraud unnoticed for some time because he had a “charismatic and persuasive” personality, was “well-liked” and “trusted in his professional and social circle”.

She said he became “particularly” financially ambitious in mid-2009, when he and his wife purchased their family home in Mount Gambier.

“Mr Bell was moving funds consistently between his loan and personal accounts to settle debts,” she said.

“It’s the prosecution case that all of the financial circumstances in the lead up to to the allegations are relevant to explain why the theft may have occurred.”

Bell had denied the allegations, which his legal team described as a “trial by smear”.

In his closing address on behalf of Bell, Mr Healy said the prosecution case was “a mad rabble” and had “more holes than a Balfours crumpet”.

“The entire prosecution case is misguided, it is misleading, it is confused and confusing and it is internally inconsistent,” he said.

Bell will now return to court next month for sentencing dates to be set.