Re AM

The case of Re AM involved an 18-year-old applicant who was charged with murder, both common law and statutory, following an incident arising from a planned robbery with gang affiliations. The applicant was on bail at the time of the incident, having been subject to probation for earlier violent offences. The applicant's bail history was poor, and there had been non-compliance with the conditions of the probation order. A report by Youth Justice was unfavourable, although family support was available and there was an offer of bail support. Since being in custody, the applicant had been involved in numerous violent incidents. The prosecution case was questionable, and the case had been fast-tracked into the Supreme Court, but an 18-month delay was still likely. The applicant was subject to onerous conditions in custody. The court was required to determine whether the applicant met the criteria for bail under the Bail Act 1977 and whether exceptional circumstances existed to warrant bail.

The court considered the factors relevant to the bail decision, including the seriousness of the offence, the likelihood of the applicant appearing in court, the risk of reoffending, and the interests of the community. The court found that the applicant did not meet the criteria for bail, as there was an unacceptable risk of reoffending and the seriousness of the offence was high. The court noted that the applicant had a poor bail history and had been non-compliant with the conditions of the probation order. The court also considered the questionable strength of the prosecution case and the availability of family support, but ultimately found that these factors did not outweigh the risks posed by the applicant. The court found that exceptional circumstances did not exist, and that the applicant posed an unacceptable risk to the community.

In conclusion, the court refused the applicant's application for bail, finding that the risks posed by the applicant outweighed any benefit of being on bail. The court noted that the applicant had been involved in numerous violent incidents since being in custody and that the case had been fast-tracked into the Supreme Court, but an 18-month delay was still likely. The court found that the applicant did not meet the criteria for bail under the Bail Act 1977 and that exceptional circumstances did not exist. The court ordered that the applicant remain in custody until the case was heard in the Supreme Court.