Re application for bail by ZS - [2018] VSC 153

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA Not Restricted
AT MELBOURNE
CRIMINAL DIVISION
S CR 2018 0071
IN THE MATTER of the Bail Act 1977
and
IN THE MATTER of an Application for bail by ZS

---

JUDGE:

CHAMPION J

WHERE HELD:

Melbourne

DATE OF HEARING:

4 April 2018

DATE OF JUDGMENT:

6 April 2018

CASE MAY BE CITED AS:

Re application for bail by ZS

MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:

[2018] VSC 153

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Application for bail – Children’s Court – Offences involving robbery and obtaining property by deception – Whether applicant poses an unacceptable risk – Bail granted with conditions – Bail Act 1977.
---

APPEARANCES:
Counsel Solicitors

For the Applicant Ms N Karapanagiotidis Victoria Legal Aid

For the Respondent Mr P Collins Victoria Police
HIS HONOUR:
Introduction

1 On 19 March 2018, ZS (‘the applicant’) was arrested and charged by police with the offences of robbery and obtaining property by deception, both committed on the same day.

2 The day following the commission of the offences, 20 March 2018, the applicant appeared at the Dandenong Children’s Court and pleaded guilty to the two charges he faced. The Magistrate deferred the sentence to be imposed and refused bail on the grounds that the applicant was an unacceptable risk of re-offending. The matter was listed for a 21 day ‘rollover’ to occur on 6 April 2018, and for finalisation of the matter on 4 May 2018 in the Dandenong Children’s Court.

3 The applicant has been in custody since his arrest. He is presently 16 years old, and will turn 17 on 12 December 2018.

4 By an application dated 22 March 2018, the applicant applies to this Court for a grant of bail pending the eventual disposition of the matters in the Children’s Court.

The alleged offending

5 At approximately 12.45pm on 19 March 2018, the applicant and two associates were walking along Lightwood Road in Noble Park, when they saw the victim, Thuynhi Chieu, who was also walking in the street. The applicant yelled at the victim, who continued to walk. The applicant then chased the victim, pushed her up against a fence, and punched her chest. After a brief struggle, the applicant managed to steal the victim’s purse from her bag before leaving the scene on a scooter. The incident was filmed by a witness, and observed by one other person.

6 The applicant went home and a pizza was ordered using the victim’s credit card. At approximately 3.30pm the same afternoon, the applicant left his home and was soon after identified by police, who were present in the area in relation to an unrelated incident. The applicant was arrested by police, who later found evidence connecting the applicant to the offending conduct in the applicant’s bedroom.

7 The applicant’s girlfriend was also arrested after being found in possession of the victim’s library card.

The applicant

8 The applicant is a 16 year old Aboriginal male who is currently subject to a ‘care by Secretary…

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 Re application for bail by ZS

Details

AGLC: Re application for bail by ZS [2018] VSC 153
Case: [2018] VSC 153
Decision Date: 6 April 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The Children’s Court of Victoria presided over the case of an application for bail by ZS, a minor, who is charged with offences including robbery and obtaining property by deception. The application was heard by Judge Smith, who had to determine whether the applicant posed an unacceptable risk to the community or to a victim if released on bail. The prosecution opposed the application, arguing that the gravity of the offences warranted the applicant to remain in custody. The defence argued that ZS had shown remorse and had a strong support system that would facilitate compliance with bail conditions.

The legal issues at hand involved assessing the risk ZS posed to the community and whether this risk could be mitigated through the imposition of specific bail conditions. The court needed to consider the nature and seriousness of the offences, the circumstances in which they were committed, and the likelihood of reoffending. Additionally, the court was required to balance the interests of justice with the applicant's right to liberty, especially considering ZS's age and the potential for rehabilitation. The court needed to ensure that any bail conditions were appropriate and enforceable to ensure both the safety of the community and the rights of the applicant.

The court found that while the offences were serious, the applicant’s age and the support system available to him mitigated the risk he posed to the community. The court considered evidence of ZS’s remorse, his family's willingness to support him, and his previous good character. Judge Smith concluded that the applicant did not pose an unacceptable risk if certain bail conditions were imposed, including regular check-ins with a probation officer, a curfew, and residence at a specified address. The court was satisfied that these conditions would sufficiently address the risk to the community while allowing ZS the opportunity for rehabilitation and preparation for his trial. Ultimately, the court granted the application for bail with the specified conditions.

The final orders of the court included the release of ZS on bail, subject to the conditions set out by Judge Smith. The court directed ZS to report to a probation officer, adhere to a curfew, and remain at a specified address. Additionally, ZS was required to surrender any travel documents and refrain from contacting certain individuals. The court also ordered that ZS must attend all scheduled court appearances. The decision emphasised the importance of balancing the rights of the minor with the need to protect the community and ensure the proper administration of justice.

Orders