|
|
 |
| |
John Baptiste is barracked as he leaves court by campaigner Barry Sullivan |
Jail for £600k Town Hall fraud
‘Guilty, guilty’ says trusted council finance man who bought home in caribbean with elderly’s cash
ONE of the Town Hall’s senior and trusted finance officers has been told he will go to prison for stealing more than £600,000 from Camden’s most vulnerable residents.
John Walter Baptiste, 57, confessed to the swindle at Wood Green Crown Court on Friday morning.
He helped himself to cash that Camden Council was supposed to be looking after on behalf of residents unable to deal with their own financial affairs.
His victims included mentally ill and elderly service users.
Instead of keeping their money safe, Baptiste pocketed his own share in a series of transactions processed over six years – the most recent early last year.
Some of those affected are thought to have been in their dying days and may have gone to their graves without realising that their accounts had been tampered with.
The scandal was only uncovered when an overdue audit of small accounts in February threw up a series of irregular transactions. Detectives combed through paperwork and council computer files, tracing the scam back to 2000.
Baptiste, who worked his way up through the council ranks and earned the trust of department chiefs, was arrested and charged by Holborn police’s fraud squad last February and suspended without pay by the council.
In a revelation that has angered his victims and their friends, the New Journal has learned that although Baptiste apparently always intended to plead guilty to the charges and will get credit in court for his open admission, he took the council to an employment tribunal – demanding that he should be paid for the time he was suspended.
That appeal – described to reporters as “unbelievable cheek” by one former colleague – was thrown out just before Christmas following a three-day hearing and at more expense to the council.
Back in the crown court on Friday, Baptiste, wearing a suit and clutching a rolled up newspaper and bottle of mineral water, admitted four charges of theft amounting to just over £620,000.
When the charges were put by a court clerk, Baptiste leaned forward in the dock and said: “Yes. Yes. Guilty. Guilty.”
It was his first opportunity to enter a plea and Judge Anna Guggenheim QC said that his acceptance of guilt would be in his favour.
But she ordered reports into his background and lifestyle, warning him that a jail term was “inevitable” when he returns to court in March for sentencing.
Baptiste, who was born in the Caribbean island of Aruba, has already surrendered his passport and has been told that he must co-operate with the pre-sentencing reports.
The hearing heard how Baptiste will offer “voluntary restitution” including the sale of a second home in the Caribbean.
Noel Lucas, defending, told the court: “There is a property in Grenada. We can’t say that it will be sold by the next hearing but we want to put things in train. We want to try voluntary restitution, we want to have a stab at it.”
Baptiste is understood to be a committed church-goer and Mr Lucas said a vicar and “another man of the cloth” were likely to provide character statements before he is sentenced.
Outside court, the finance officer looked startled when a New Journal reporter asked him to explain himself and give his side of the story.
He simply said: “No. No.”
There was no answer at his Edwardian terraced home in Sydenham, south London, yesterday (Wednesday) and post had been uncollected in the letterbox. Neighbours said they were more familiar with Baptiste’s wife and daughter, who is in her late teens, and that together they seemed like a “happy family”.
His home – which has beige leather sofas and a large screen television in the lounge – is decorated with snaps of Baptiste and his relatives including one in which he is smiling and wearing a dinner suit.
Mr Lucas told Friday’s hearing that the case “would have a devastating effect” on the “very close family”.
He said that Baptiste’s wife had suffered a stroke after the birth of their daughter.
Baptiste bought the Sydenham house in the late 1990s for £138,000 but the property’s value could be double that now.
Council sources suggested that the Town Hall is determined to recover as much money as possible from Baptiste and outside investigators are thought to be examining what assets could be confiscated.
Some of Baptiste’s victims are still waiting to be repaid.
The Town Hall has been hit by its fair share of fraud scandals in recent years, including a giant £1.7 million scam at the heart of its housing benefits office, brought to public attention by the New Journal in 2005. That swindle was inexplicably missed by a series of audits over ten years.
But public anger is running higher than ever over Baptiste’s case because the money was taken directly from vulnerable people who had little chance to detect irregularities with their accounts, let alone complain.
Many of the victims were relying on the council because they had no close relatives to help.
Baptiste was barracked when he left an earlier court hearing at Highbury Corner Magistrates Court. At the time, the New Journal did not publish photos of the protest to avoid jeopardising any future trial and on the basis that Baptiste was innocent until proven otherwise – but they reveal the strength of feeling.
Camden said it was committed to “openness” surrounding the case.
Baptiste’s council office in Camden Road looked after around 500 bank accounts. In 20 cases Camden Council has been appointed by the Court of Protection to act for the resident as a receiver.
The case raises serious questions about how the swindle could be missed for so long.
The official council response is that at some stage, employees in the finance department have to be given a certain amount of trust.
A spokesman said: “Since the discovery of the fraud a major reorganisation of the management structure in this area has taken place together with an in-depth review of the internal control procedures.
“John Baptiste was a senior officer in a position of trust. Because of his duties it was necessary for him to be able to take independent action in relation to managing our customers financial affairs.”
He added: “There is no doubt that he abused the trust placed in him as well as his seniority in the office to be able to commit this fraud. He also colluded with someone outside of the council. This kind of fraud can be notoriously difficult to uncover.”
|
 |
|
|
|
