Edwards v The Queen (No 2) - [2022] NSWSC 1344

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Edwards v R (No 2) [2022] NSWSC 1344
Hearing dates: 4 October 2022
Date of orders: 4 October 2022
Decision date: 04 October 2022
Jurisdiction: Common Law
Before: Beech-Jones CJ at CL
Decision:
Bail granted on conditions

Catchwords:
BAIL APPLICATION – applicant charged with five counts of drive manner dangerous causing death – 18 years old – no prior convictions – deteriorating mental health – bail concerns addressed by proposed bail conditions – bail granted

Legislation Cited:
Bail Act 2013 (NSW)
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Tyrell Edwards (Applicant)
Rex (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr G James KC; Mr E James (Applicant)
Mr CM Everson SC (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Watson Law (Applicant)
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2022/274859

EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT

Just before 8:00pm on the evening of 6 September 2022, a utility vehicle said to have been driven at high speed came off East Parade at Buxton and struck two trees in succession. The applicant for bail, Tyrell Edwards, was driving the vehicle. A 16-year-old boy was in the front passenger seat. In the rear of the vehicle were four young people, two aged 15, and two aged 14. Only the applicant survived. The grief and suffering occasioned by the parents, families and friends of the young people who died is taken as a given on this application.
On or about 7 September 2022, the applicant was charged with five counts of driving in a manner dangerous causing death contrary to s 52A(1)(c) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). He was refused bail and has been in custody ever since. He is 18 years of age. He obtained his provisional driver’s licence in February 2021. He incurred two speeding violations a few months afterwards. His provisional licence was then suspended but it was returned to him in August 2022. It was suspended again after the incident the subject of these proceedings. He does not have a criminal record, a matter of particular significance to a bail application.

The Offence

The maximum penalty for an offence under s 52A(1)(c) of the Crimes Act is 10 years’ imprisonment. There is no standard non-parole period for the offence. Although the Crown has not yet been required to particularise its case, it seems that the alleged “manner dangerous” is speed and dangerous steering and doing so with at least one unrestrained passenger in the vehicle.
Tendered on this application was a statement of the alleged facts of the offending prepared by the police. The statement contends that, immediately prior to the accident, the applicant’s vehicle crossed onto the wrong side of East Parade before the offside tyres moved on the grassed shoulder and then moved back onto the correct side of the road. The facts describe the vehicle then rotating clockwise before colliding with a large tree near the shoulder of the road which caused it to rotate anti-clockwise and then collide with a second tree. The impact caused the rear seat…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Edwards v The Queen (No 2)

Details

AGLC: Edwards v The Queen (No 2) [2022] NSWSC 1344
Case: [2022] NSWSC 1344
Decision Date: 04 October 2022

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Edwards v The Queen (No 2) involved the applicant, Edwards, who was facing five counts of dangerous driving causing death. The case was heard in an Australian court where the applicant sought bail. The applicant, aged 18 at the time, had no prior criminal convictions. However, there were significant concerns regarding the applicant's deteriorating mental health, which impacted the consideration of bail. The court was required to weigh these concerns against the principles of bail, including the applicant's right to liberty and the need to ensure the safety of the community.

The central legal issue before the court was whether the applicant should be granted bail, considering the seriousness of the charges and his mental health issues. The court had to determine whether the proposed bail conditions were sufficient to address the concerns regarding the safety of the community and whether those conditions could adequately manage the risk posed by the applicant's mental health. The court also considered the principles of natural justice and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

In delivering the decision, the court acknowledged the gravity of the charges and the potential community safety concerns. However, it found that the proposed bail conditions were comprehensive and could sufficiently manage the risks associated with the applicant's mental health. The court was satisfied that the conditions would ensure the applicant's attendance at court and would mitigate any risk to the community. Consequently, the court granted the applicant bail, subject to the proposed conditions. The decision emphasised the importance of balancing the rights of the accused with the need to protect the community.

Orders