A woman who cried foul after losing her life savings in a house “flipping” scheme sparred in the Supreme Court over her awareness of the risks she was taking.Lawyer Charles Richardson is defending Cedric Oates, 41, against a charge of making a statement that he knew was false, misleading or deceptive.Canadian schoolteacher Dianne Laird maintains that she trusted a lie when she gave Mr Oates a total of $345,000 to buy and sell US houses through his associate Michael Hopkins in 2009.Yesterday in court Mr Richardson questioned her assertion that she went into the deal simply because she believed Mr Oates, who had coached her basketball team.“You were aware from your own general knowledge about flipping mortgaged homes,” Mr Richardson told the 45-year-old. “It’s a great deal — only if all goes well.”Ms Laird insisted that “Cedric wasn’t talking about that at all” when she parted with the money, and that she hadn’t researched how the scheme might potentially fail.Pointing to her evidence in chief, Mr Richardson noted that at one point she’d asked her friend “Why now? It looks crazy.”But Ms Laird said she got only assurances that buyers existed for the properties in Tacoma, Washington, that were being purchased through Mr Hopkins.“If everything had gone to plan, you could have made a lot of money,” Mr Richardson said.She replied: “Someone did make a lot of money, but it wasn’t me.”The defence lawyer said no one had made any profit off the scheme.Ms Laird has also held that Mr Oates and his associate did not share paperwork with her.She said the deal had been supposedly to purchase a property referred to as “48th Street”, but in September she was “nonchalantly” told that another property was being bought instead. “I think everything was a lie,” she added.Mr Richardson produced a copy of a document that purportedly showed an arrangement to get an extension on the purchase of 48th Street, but Ms Laird remained sceptical.The court has heard that Mr Oates and Mr Hopkins had formed a limited liability company for the deal, which Ms Laird’s name was never added to.The witness said she was left off because they told her that as a Canadian citizen, it would lead to tax complications — which she believed was “a lame excuse”.Mr Richardson then produced documents which he asserted showed it was true.“You said that when Cedric Oates said to you that he would make inquiries of Mike to see about getting your name on the LLC in mid-June, you said now that you believe he was lying to you. Do you still adhere to that?”Ms Laird said it looked from the document as if Mr Oates “did ask him” after all.Mr Richardson asked her if she believed the company, Tac48 LLC, was never formed.“I never got paperwork for it,” she answered. “It was formed, but my name was not on it.”The case continues.