Re DR - [2019] VSC 151

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

S ECR 2019 0031

IN THE MATTER of the Bail Act 1977
and
IN THE MATTER of an application for bail by DR

---

JUDGE:	CHAMPION J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	22 February 2019 & 8 March 2019
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	13 March 2019
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Re DR
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2019] VSC 151

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Application for bail – Child applicant – Charges of theft, unlicensed driving, aggravated home invasion, aggravated burglary, recklessly causing injury, affray, unlawful assault – Applicant required to show exceptional circumstances – Youth Justice not supporting bail – Mental health concerns – PTSD resulting from traumatic childhood – Limited criminal history – Time spent in custody – Likely sentence – Family support – Bail granted with conditions – Bail Act 1977.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Applicant	Ms N. Karapanagiotidis	James Dowsley & Associates
For the Respondent	Mr N. Moran	Victoria Police

HIS HONOUR:

Introduction

The applicant is 16 years old and has been in custody since 8 August 2018.

On 5 February 2019, the applicant filed an application for bail in this Court in respect to various charges relating to incidents alleged to have occurred between 10 June and 11 August 2018.

At the time of all alleged offences, the applicant was on a 12 month good behaviour bond, granted by the Werribee Children’s Court on 1 May 2018.

The alleged offending
Informant Mason

On 10 June 2018 at approximately 5.15am, four individuals entered a home in Pakenham. They located car keys and left the premises, stealing a vehicle. At approximately 5.41am, the vehicle attended a service station in Longwarry, where a male filled it with petrol to the value of $71.16 and left without paying.

Later that morning, a witness reported the vehicle parked on a nature strip in Traralgon. Police arrested a group of eight teenagers, including the applicant, in that vicinity. Video footage was located on the phone of one of the co-accused, depicting the applicant in the driver’s seat of a vehicle resembling the stolen sedan. All individuals were released pending further inquiries.

The applicant was arrested on 14 June 2018 and gave a no comment interview regarding the allegations. He was charged with aggravated home invasion, home invasion, aggravated burglary, burglary, unlicensed driving, theft (two counts), handling stolen goods, and using a controlled weapon without excuse. On 28 June 2018, the Dandenong Children’s Court granted the applicant bail on these charges.

On 26 November 2018, the Dandenong Children’s Court acquitted the applicant of all charges, except one count of theft and unlicensed driving. On 14 December 2018, the Court refused an application for bail in respect to these remaining charges, which are next listed on 21 March 2019 for a part heard plea.

Informant Tom

At approximately 1.55am on 6 August 2018, it is alleged that the applicant and three co-accused attended an address in Corio, where a…

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 DR

Details

AGLC: Re Dr [2019] VSC 151
Case: [2019] VSC 151
Decision Date: 13 March 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Re DR, the applicant, a child facing multiple serious charges, sought bail from the court. DR is charged with theft, unlicensed driving, aggravated home invasion, aggravated burglary, recklessly causing injury, affray, and unlawful assault. The court was required to determine whether DR should be granted bail, considering the exceptional circumstances necessary for a child applicant to secure bail under the Bail Act 1977.

The court had to weigh the severity of the charges against DR's personal circumstances. It considered the youth's limited criminal history and the time already spent in custody, along with the potential sentence if convicted. DR's mental health, specifically the diagnosis of PTSD stemming from a traumatic childhood, was a significant factor in the court's deliberations. The court also took into account the support DR would have from family if granted bail. Balancing these factors, the court concluded that bail was appropriate given the exceptional circumstances.

The court granted DR bail, imposing specific conditions to ensure compliance and public safety. These conditions included strict reporting requirements, electronic monitoring, and limitations on DR's movements. The court emphasised the importance of the family support system in ensuring DR adhered to the bail conditions. The decision underscored the need to consider the broader context of the applicant's life when determining bail for a child.

Orders