Sentencing — obtaining by deception — Ponzi scheme — $2,000,000 loss — imprisonment — Crimes Act 1961, s 240 — R v Varjan CA 97/03, 26 June 2003 — R v Scott [2017] NZHC 2510 — R v Robinson [2015] NZHC 1673 — Cherry v R [2013] NZCA 636 — Arnott v R [2015] NZCA 236. The defendant appeared for sentencing after pleading guilty to 10 charges of obtaining by deception. Essentially the defendant had operated a Ponzi scheme, deceiving seven victims into giving him money on the promise of high returns. The funds from one victim were used to pay back another but eventually payments stopped as the defendant used the money for his gambling. The defendant had been on bail in order to complete restorative justice when he committed the offending relating to the last three charges. Over $3,400,000 had been dishonestly obtained and the first seven victims suffered a total loss of $2,000,000. The total loss to the eighth victim was $21,050. The Judge referred to case law, noting there was no tariff case for major fraud but offending should be assessed in light of guidance from previous decisions. Aggravating factors of the offending were the scale of the offending, the repetitive and prolonged period (18 months) over which it occurred, breach of trust, premeditation and sophistication and the harm suffered by the victims. There were no mitigating factors. A starting sentence of seven years' imprisonment was adopted. This was uplifted by six months for the offending while the defendant was on bail and purporting to be undertaking rehabilitation and restorative justice. A discount of nine months was given to recognise the defendant's willingness to engage in counselling and treatment and the lack of previous convictions. This was then reduced by 25 percent for the defendant's early guilty plea, which saved the victim's the stress of going through a trial. For totality , this was rounded down one month to a final sentence of 5 years' imprisonment. No minimum period of imprisonment was ordered, as the Judge decided the parole board would be in the best position to make a decision about any early release. An order for final name suppression of all victims was also granted. Judgment Date: 1 March 2019.