R v Mikel Fajloun

[2007] NSWDC 378

CITATION:	R v Mikel Fajloun [2007] NSWDC 378
HEARING DATE(S):	13 December 2007
JUDGMENT DATE:	13 December 2007
JURISDICTION:	District Court of New South Wales
JUDGMENT OF:	Cogswell SC DCJ
DECISION:	Application for bail is refused.
CATCHWORDS:	CRIMINAL LAW - Bail application - convicted by jury - likelihood of full-time custody sentence - need to obtain psychiatric evidence - strong community ties and impact on family
LEGISLATION CITED:	Bail Act, 1978
PARTIES:	R Mikel Fajloun
FILE NUMBER(S):	06/21/0247
COUNSEL:	Ms Herbert
SOLICITORS:	Mr Tabchouri

JUDGMENT

1. Mr Mikel Fajloun applies for bail. He was convicted along with his brother, by a jury, of two very serious offences. The convictions were last month. The offences involved the violent entry into the unit of Mr Raad Fajloun’s (Mr Mikel Fajloun’s brother) estranged wife, kidnapping her and detaining her at another place. The events were accompanied by physical violence and the use of an axe to break down a door. The victim was literally dragged from her home and put into a car driven by Mr Mikel Fajloun.

2. Mr Tabchouri, who appeared for him today, supported his application for bail on the basis of the need to obtain psychiatric evidence. It would be much easier to obtain it if he was at liberty than if he were in custody. He emphasised the fact that his client is a contributor to the mortgage on the family home. The mortgage is overdue and his family is in significant financial difficulty. He emphasised Mr Mikel Fajloun’s community ties. He emphasised as well the different role which his client played in the offences compared with Mr Raad Fajloun.

3. I regard the significant factor in this case as the fact that he has been convicted of two very serious offences by a jury. Once again it seems to me to be likely, although I do not pre-judge this, that he will face a period of full-time custody. The obtaining of any psychiatric evidence in order to support his case on sentence may be more difficult or expensive because he is in custody but it can still be obtained and will not prejudice his position.

4. As strong as his community ties are and as difficult as his custody will be for his family, given their financial circumstances, those factors do not, in my opinion, outweigh the appropriateness for him to be in custody having been convicted by the jury. His role was different to his brother’s in the sense that he accompanied his brother and his brother was probably the initiator of the exercise. However, he accompanied his brother into the unit, accompanied his brother in removing forcibly his brother’s wife and drove the car to the place where she was kept. For a short period of time he was present there as well. His different role in the crimes was not such that it would warrant a significantly varied approach to a bail application.

5. The Crown also expresses concern for the victim of the crimes. Her security arrangements have been changed based upon the fact that Mr Mikel Fajloun and his brother are in custody.

6. For all of the above reasons I do not regard this as an appropriate case for bail and I refuse the application.

**********