R v AX

[2015] ACTSC 292

SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Case Title:

R v AX

Citation:

[2015] ACTSC 292

Hearing Date(s):

11 September 2015

DecisionDate:

11 September 2015

Before:

Refshauge J

Decision:

AX be granted bail to appear in the ACT Supreme Court on 17 November 2015 on the following conditions:

a)     That he travel on 11 September 2015, in the company of his grandparents to Oolong House, 11 Junction Street, Nowra and admit himself to and remain in the rehabilitation program conducted by that agency; 

b)     That, if he is not admitted to the program, or leaves that program, or is discharged before he completes the program, he is to report in person to the Registrar of the Supreme Court within one working day with a view to his bail being reviewed; 

c)     That he complete the residential rehabilitation program at Oolong House and obey all reasonable directions of the officer in charge of the program; 

d)     That he consent to the officer in charge of the program providing details of his progress and participation in the program to his solicitor; 

e)     That he not consume alcohol or possess or consume illicit drugs; and

f)     That he return to Canberra on 16 November 2015 for the purpose of appearing in court on 17 November 2015 and reside at [redacted] while in Canberra.

Catchwords:

CRIMINAL LAW – Jurisdiction, practice and procedure – bail – application to vary bail – applicant seeking rehabilitation – deferred sentence order

Cases Cited:

Saga v Reid [2010] ACTSC 59

Parties:

The Queen (Crown)

AX (Defendant)

Representation:

Counsel

Mr A Williamson (Crown)

Mr T Pasipanodya (Defendant)

Solicitors

ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)

Prudential Legal Solutions (Defendant)

File Number(s):

SCC 171 of 2014

REFSHAUGE J:

1. AX has been charged with offences of possessing child pornography, using a child to produce child pornography and two counts of using a carriage service to transmit child pornography.

1. He was granted bail on 25 August 2015 to attend a drug rehabilitation program at the Weigelly Centre, Woodstock, NSW.  Unfortunately, when that agency learnt of the offences with which he had been charged, it declined to admit him to the program.

1. Subsequently, AX was assessed as suitable to attend a similar program at Oolong House.  I have described that program in R v McMahon [2015] ACTSC 14 at [22]-[23]. On 7 September 2015, I varied his bail conditions to permit him to attend that program.

1. AX entered the program on 7 September 2015 in accordance with the conditions of his bail undertaking.  On 10 September 2015, however, he was discharged because he was found in possession of cannabis.

1. Nevertheless, the Acting Chief Executive Officer of the Oolong Aboriginal Corporation, which conducts the program, said that AX had “shown commitment to the program and been very active in the CBT (Cognitive Behaviour Therapy) groups.”  As a result, and rather unusually, the agency was prepared to allow him to re-enter the program.

1. Accordingly, AX has applied for a further bail variation to permit that.  The…