Netflix's 'Con Mum' Faces Fraud Charges in Singapore Court, Claims She Has No One to Bail Her Out

Dionne Marie Hanna, the British woman at the center of Netflix’s explosive documentary Con Mum, appeared in a Singapore court on Thursday facing multiple charges of fraud involving hundreds of thousands of dollars. The 84-year-old woman, who became an internet sensation after the release of the documentary in March, told the court in a frail voice that she had no one to bail her out.

Hanna, who was charged earlier this month with five counts of fraud involving three individuals, was brought into the courtroom via video link from a police station. Sitting in a wheelchair and appearing disoriented, she was unrepresented by a lawyer and struggled to hear the proceedings clearly. Despite her frailty, the charges she faces are grave and could lead to a prison sentence of up to 20 years if she is convicted.

Prosecutors stated during Thursday’s hearing that Hanna’s alleged fraudulent activities resulted in financial losses amounting to SG$500,000 (approximately $381,000). The court set her bail at SG$50,000 ($38,100), a sum she claimed she could not afford, emphasizing, “I don’t have anybody to bail me out.”

The charges stem from a series of alleged scams that gained international attention after Con Mum aired on Netflix. The documentary follows the emotional journey of renowned British pastry chef Graham Hornigold, whose life was turned upside down after receiving an unexpected email from Hanna, claiming to be his biological mother. As the two reconnected, Hanna allegedly exploited his trust and conned him out of a significant amount of money.

The Netflix documentary gained traction for its shocking revelations, emotional depth, and the final twist confirming via a DNA test that Hanna is, in fact, Hornigold’s biological mother. The story sparked intense public debate and media coverage, both for its dramatic narrative and the moral complexity of familial deception and trust.

Following the documentary’s release on March 25, the Singapore Police Force received several new reports from alleged victims who claim they were defrauded by Hanna using similar deceptive tactics. This led to renewed investigations and the formal charges now facing her in court.

One of the key charges involves Hanna allegedly defrauding a Singaporean man named Paiman Bin Supangat. According to court documents, Hanna told Supangat she was a member of the Brunei royal family and was suffering from terminal cancer. She promised to leave her substantial wealth to him and his son. As part of the scheme, Supangat was persuaded to transfer money for supposed legal fees and to open overseas bank accounts to facilitate the “inheritance.”

“The victims believed her investment and release of inheritance to be genuine and made several transfers to her,” the Singapore police noted earlier this month. It’s a familiar con tactic wrapped in emotional manipulation—offering a windfall in exchange for upfront costs.

This case has once again highlighted the vulnerabilities that can be exploited by con artists, particularly among those swayed by emotional appeals or the promise of financial gain. What makes Hanna’s case uniquely compelling is the intersection of her real-life familial connection with Hornigold and the elaborate cons she is accused of orchestrating against others.

At 84 years old, Hanna’s situation also raises questions about age, accountability, and how legal systems should treat elderly individuals accused of serious crimes. While her physical frailty and claims of isolation are likely to evoke some public sympathy, prosecutors remain firm that the severity of the fraud warrants a strict judicial process.

The documentary’s exposure has played a significant role in bringing Hanna’s actions to light and ensuring that alleged victims across jurisdictions are heard. It has also reignited discussions around the ethical responsibilities of streaming platforms in showcasing real-life crime stories that may still be unfolding legally.

Her next court hearing is scheduled for May 16, and it remains to be seen whether she will secure legal representation or bail before then. Until that time, Dionne Hanna remains in custody, awaiting trial for a scandal that began as a personal drama and has since escalated into a high-profile international legal saga.

As the court case progresses, more details are expected to emerge regarding the full scope of Hanna’s alleged cons, the psychological and financial impact on her victims, and how justice will be served in one of the most unusual fraud cases Singapore has seen in recent years.