Re Barker - [2020] VSC 321

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

S ECR 2020 0081

IN THE MATTER of the Bail Act 1977

and

IN THE MATTER of an Application for Bail by CONRAD BARKER

---

JUDGE:	CHAMPION J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	11 May 2020
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	14 May 2020
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Re Barker
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2020] VSC 321

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Application for bail – Young adult applicant – Charges of aggravated carjacking, armed robbery, reckless conduct endangering life, arson, common law assault and possessing a drug of dependence – Alleged offences committed while applicant on a Community Correction Order – Applicant required to show exceptional circumstances – Criminal history including breaching conditions of bail and Community Correction Order – Exceptional reasons not shown – Bail refused – Bail Act 1977.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Crown	Mr J. McWilliams	Office of the Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Mr M. McGrath with Mr W. Blake	Giorgianni & Liang Lawyers

HIS HONOUR:

Introduction

On 25 March 2020, Conrad Barker (‘the applicant’) was arrested and charged with aggravated carjacking (possessing a firearm), armed robbery, reckless conduct endangering life, arson, common law assault and possessing a drug of dependence (methamphetamine). The first five charges relate to events alleged to have occurred on 7 January 2020, involving the applicant and co-accused James Nichols, India Braniff and an unknown third male. The drug possession charge is presumed to have arisen during the course of the applicant’s arrest.

The applicant applies for a grant of bail from this Court, having been refused bail on 8 April 2020 by His Honour Magistrate Coghlan in the Geelong Magistrates’ Court. The applicant’s co-accused James Nichols is presently on remand, and India Braniff is on bail. The matter is next listed for a committal mention on 12 June 2020.

At the time of the alleged offending, the applicant was subject to a four year Community Correction Order (‘CCO’) imposed in November 2017. The CCO was granted in respect of convictions for driving and dishonesty offences. The applicant later breached the CCO and was convicted of contravening a number of its conditions, including being convicted of further offences involving theft, burglary and drug possession. The CCO has since been extended until 8 November 2021.

With respect to the present charges, the applicant is accused of committing a Schedule 1 offence within the meaning of s 3 of the Bail Act 1977 (‘the Act’), namely, aggravated carjacking,[1] and Schedule 2 offences of armed robbery,[2] reckless conduct endangering life,[3], attempted arson[4] and common assault[5] during a period of a CCO. The applicant must show exceptional circumstances by virtue of being charged with these offences,[6] as well as for the Schedule 2 offence of possessing a drug of dependence while on a CCO.[7] It is not disputed that the Court must refuse bail unless satisfied by the applicant that exceptional circumstances exist justifying bail.[8]
[1]Bail Act 1977 (Vic) sch 1,…

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 Barker

Details

AGLC: Re Barker [2020] VSC 321
Case: [2020] VSC 321
Decision Date: 14 May 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Re Barker involved an application for bail by the applicant, Barker, who faced multiple serious charges including aggravated carjacking, armed robbery, reckless conduct endangering life, arson, common law assault, and possessing a drug of dependence. Barker was already on a Community Correction Order when the alleged offences were committed. The matter was heard in a relevant Australian court, where the presiding judge had to determine whether exceptional circumstances existed that would warrant the grant of bail.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether Barker had demonstrated exceptional circumstances that would justify the granting of bail, given the seriousness of the charges and the fact that the alleged offences were committed while Barker was subject to a Community Correction Order. The court considered Barker’s criminal history, which included breaches of bail and the conditions of the Community Correction Order, in determining whether exceptional circumstances existed.

In delivering the decision, the court emphasised the gravity of the charges and the risk of reoffending, particularly as Barker had a history of breaching court orders. The judge found that Barker had not presented any exceptional reasons that would warrant a departure from the usual practice of denying bail for such serious offences. Consequently, the court refused the application for bail, highlighting the need for Barker to comply with legal obligations to avoid further entrenching their criminal conduct.

The final orders of the court were that Barker’s application for bail was refused, and they were to remain in custody pending the outcome of the criminal proceedings against them.

Orders