In the Matter of an Application for Bail by Jeremy William Schwalm
[2014] ACTSC 378
•12 September 2014
SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
Case Title: | In the Matter of an Application for Bail by Jeremy William Schwalm |
Citation: | [2014] ACTSC 378 |
Hearing Date(s): | 12 September 2014 |
DecisionDate: | 12 September 2014 |
Before: | Refshauge J |
Decision: | The application for bail be refused. |
Category: | Principal Judgment |
Catchwords: | CRIMINAL LAW – Bail – Applicant has long criminal history – Applicant has history of drug use – Applicant’s father unwell – Applicant on conditional liberty at the time of the alleged offences – Risk that Applicant may commit further offences if granted bail – Application for bail refused |
Parties: | Jeremy William Schwalm (Applicant) The Crown (Respondent) |
Representation: | Counsel Self-represented (Applicant) Mr A Williamson (Respondent) |
| Solicitors Self-represented (Applicant) ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Respondent) | |
File Number(s): | SCC 202 of 2014 |
Refshauge J:
Jeremy William Schwalm has applied for bail. He appeared in the Magistrates Court on 28 May 2014. He has been in custody since that time. He was charged with offences of minor theft, cultivating cannabis, possessing cannabis, burglary, aggravated burglary, two counts of theft, driving while disqualified, being a repeat offender and dishonestly driving a motor vehicle without consent.
He has a long and undistinguished criminal history. So far as I can tell, it appears that he has most recently been in custody in New South Wales for offences committed in 2011 when he received substantial terms of imprisonment, including what appears to be a parole period of about six months, from which he has been released on parole.
I am told, however, that if he is convicted of these offences, that parole will be revoked and he will serve the balance of that period of imprisonment. Given his long and undistinguished history since 1999 with many offences of dishonesty, although many of the offences are traffic offences also, it is likely that, if he is convicted of these offences, a custodial sentence will be imposed.
He acknowledges that he has been a drug user and was addicted, but says that since he has been in the Alexander Maconochie Centre, he has been on the methadone program and, as such, he has no longer a drug need, although the evidence about that is a little uncertain, as he suggested that the methadone was in fact prescribed for back injury and that may well be true, but, if so, it is not clear what the relationship between that and his drug addiction currently is.
He has on his record a number of convictions for breaching bail and failing to appear in accordance with his bail undertakings from time to time, which is, of course, a matter of significant concern. The main reason why he seeks bail is that his father is very ill and has recently been hospitalised. On one occasion when he had some kind of attack where he describes, in a letter to the Court, that he was “nearly dead”, Mr Schwalm, the applicant, was present and managed to call the ambulance. He has, however, been in hospital more recently and left hospital since then.
The evidence I had seemed to indicate that a former girlfriend or partner of Mr Schwalm is currently living with his father, Mr William Schwalm. Mr Jeremy Schwalm, the applicant, expresses some concern about her capacity to be able to look after his father, although it appears that he has managed to live without apparent incident since Mr Jeremy Schwalm has been in the Alexander Maconochie Centre, and, indeed, has been able to be hospitalised and released from the hospital, presumably with an appropriate discharge plan, notwithstanding Mr Schwalm being in custody. It is difficult, in the circumstances, to accept that Mr Jeremy Schwalm’s presence is necessary.
Mr William Schwalm was apparently an abusive alcoholic and, although Mr Jeremy Schwalm has seven sisters, four of whom live in Canberra, it appears that they take little if much interest at all in their father and that may well be justified if the description of his behaviour is accurate and a legitimate concern.
I heard some evidence which suggests that Mr Jeremy Schwalm, if released on bail, would abscond to Tasmania. He denies that and, in the circumstances, I am not in a position to say that that is likely. It is suggested that Mr William Schwalm wants to relocate to Queensland and if he does so he would want his son to go with him.
That does not seem to me to be a flight risk in the sense that I would need to be concerned about that under bail conditions. However, in all the circumstances, while I have every sympathy with the plight that Mr Jeremy Schwalm’s father is in, his concern for his father and his wish to provide assistance and comfort to him, it seems to me that his criminal history and his more recent history is a legitimate basis on which I can find that there is a real risk that he may commit further offences while on bail and that there is some risk that he would not appear to answer his bail if bail were granted.
Accordingly, in all the circumstances, I refuse the application.
| I certify that the preceding ten [10] numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Judgment of his Honour Justice Refshauge. Associate: Date: 27 January 2015 |
0
0
0