AMENDED LAW LISTS FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF TASMANIA MONDAY, 24 MAY 2021
HOBART
Court 1, Salamanca Place, HobartBefore Chief Justice BLOWCriminal JurisdictionNot Before 10:30a.m.BDR
Thomas Phillip Triffett
Floyd Dillon Mansfield
Amanda Louise White
GLR
Jake Paul Killy-Vear Moltoni
10:45a.m.For Bail Application Anita Maree Blake
11:15a.m.For Directions Hearing by video-link to Hobart Reception Prison
Braydon Leigh Hopkinson
Caleb Adams
Jack Bradley Harvey
For Directions Hearing by video-link to Risdon Prison Complex
Adam Paul Alexander
MMP
Jonathon Henry Holmes
Tyler Anthony James Causon
For Directions Hearing by video-link to Risdon Prison Complex, Ron Barwick Prison and PWR, Cameron Street, LauncestonZHB
JRB
LEC
JDP
VDS
For Directions Hearing
Andrew Roger Fairfield
David Ian Coles
Daniel Nicky Smith
ART
William Mark Hutchinson
Michael Laurence Sawford
TPB
Joshua James Barda
Peter Stanley Cormie
Wayne James Benjamin
Barrie Linton Arnold
Alex Bresnehan
JKW
Zane Christopher Benson
SHH
Matthew Lionel Knowles
Garry Matthews
Jye Matthew Lowry
For Application to Vary Bail
Ashley Dean Brown
For Plea
Aarif Billah Eldaleh
For Bail Consent
Karen Patricia Nancy Keefe
Maryann Wall
AJC
PAC
MJP
Bryce Robert Richardson
Jeremy Mark Quinn
Tara Elizabeth Irwin
Kevin John Clancy
DLQ
Fahad Al-Dakak
Joshua George Hector Clark
Annabelle Vanessa Millhouse
Aiden Michael James Spaulding
Rad John Pearsall
JAGD
Emily Ruth Brown
Sharon Maree BaileyMarcus Alexander Clayton
Gregory John Hall
Anthony James Hill
James Stuart Walker
Arron David Roots
James Harold Coomer
Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice ESTCOURT
Criminal Jurisdiction
Not before 11:00 a.m.
For Mention via video-link to Risdon Prison Complex 2
Grant-Lee Michael Hawdon
Daniel Joseph Williams
For Mention
Lisa Maree Wells
Jake Mark Pearce
For Sentencing Submissions
Cheyenne Margaret McGuire
For Sentence
Joel Peter Young
Rachael Anne Hardy
For Application to Review an Order
Gary James Brodie
For Bail Consent
Jed Curtis Leggett
Court 2, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice PEARCE
Criminal Jurisdiction
4:15pm
For Directions Hearing
Emma-Lisa Eronen
Court 7, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Justice BRETT
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00am
For Trial
Brendan Edward Cotter
(Part-heard)
Court 8, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Acting Justice PORTER
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Trial
Kye John Edward Charles Louney
Derek Leslie Graeme Smith
4:15p.m.
For Bail Consent
John David Clinton
Matthew Lee Pearce
For Sentence
Thomas Ezekiel Ricketts
Jarrod Christopher Shaw
Court 3, Salamanca Place, Hobart
Before Associate Justice HOLT
10.00a.m.
For Hearing via Teams
CHAMBER MATTER
LAUNCESTON
PWR, Cameron Street, LauncestonBefore Chief Justice BLOWCriminal JurisdictionNot Before 10:30a.m.For Directions Hearing by video-link from Court 1, Salamanca Place, HobartVDS
Court 1, Cameron Street, Launceston
Before Acting Justice MARSHALL
Criminal Jurisdiction
10:00a.m.
For Directions Hearing
Jacob Alexander Ralph Haworth
For Bail Consent
John Gregory Peck
Stephen Thomas Heath
For Trial
Brett Julian Robinson-Stacey
4:15p.m.
For Bail Application
Kyam Keith Broadby
BURNIE
NO LAW LIST FOR BURNIE
Details
- Case
- [2021] TASSCCourtlist 157
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In the Supreme Court of Tasmania, Chief Justice Blow presided over a criminal case involving multiple defendants, including Thomas Phillip Triffett, Floyd Dillon Mansfield, and others, with Amanda Louise White and Jake Paul Killy-Vear Moltoni listed as complainants. The defendants faced various charges, including bail applications and directions hearings. The legal issues before the court involved the determination of bail conditions, the scheduling of trials, and the management of ongoing criminal proceedings. The court had to consider the specifics of each defendant's case, including the nature of the charges, the risk of flight, the likelihood of reoffending, and the interests of justice.
The court's reasoning focused on assessing the individual circumstances of each defendant, weighing the risk factors against the interests of the community and the defendants. For some defendants, the court granted bail with stringent conditions, while for others, the proceedings were scheduled for further directions or trial. The Chief Justice emphasised the need for a balanced approach, ensuring that the defendants' rights were protected while also safeguarding public safety. The outcome of the hearings resulted in a mix of bail approvals, trial dates set, and continued monitoring of ongoing cases.
The final orders issued by the court included the granting of bail with specific conditions for certain defendants, the scheduling of trial dates for others, and the continuation of directions hearings for those whose cases required further investigation. The court also addressed issues related to video-link appearances, ensuring that defendants had the opportunity to participate in their hearings while adhering to COVID-19 safety protocols. Overall, the court's decisions reflected a careful consideration of each defendant's individual circumstances and the broader implications for the administration of justice.
The court's reasoning focused on assessing the individual circumstances of each defendant, weighing the risk factors against the interests of the community and the defendants. For some defendants, the court granted bail with stringent conditions, while for others, the proceedings were scheduled for further directions or trial. The Chief Justice emphasised the need for a balanced approach, ensuring that the defendants' rights were protected while also safeguarding public safety. The outcome of the hearings resulted in a mix of bail approvals, trial dates set, and continued monitoring of ongoing cases.
The final orders issued by the court included the granting of bail with specific conditions for certain defendants, the scheduling of trial dates for others, and the continuation of directions hearings for those whose cases required further investigation. The court also addressed issues related to video-link appearances, ensuring that defendants had the opportunity to participate in their hearings while adhering to COVID-19 safety protocols. Overall, the court's decisions reflected a careful consideration of each defendant's individual circumstances and the broader implications for the administration of justice.
Orders
Orders of the court
Full text does not contain this section.
Background
Background to the litigation
Full text does not contain this section.
Evidence
Evidence Before The Court
Full text does not contain this section.
Decision
Reasons for decision
Full text does not contain this section.
Ratio Decidendi
Legal Principle Established
Full text does not contain this section.