Re Hewett (Bail Application) - [2015] VSC 606

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

S CR 2015 0157

IN THE MATTER of the Bail Act 1977

and

IN THE MATTER of an Application for Bail by EDWARD HEWETT

---

JUDGE:	PRIEST JA
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	4 November 2015
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	4 November 2015
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Re Hewett (Bail Application)
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2015] VSC 606

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Bail – Murder – Exceptional circumstances – Bail refused.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Crown	Mr P A Stefanovic	Ms V Anscombe, Acting Solicitor for Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Ms S Pratt	Paul Vale Criminal Law

HIS HONOUR:

Edward Hewett, the applicant, aged 22 years, is charged with murder. He seeks bail. By virtue of s 4(2)(a) of the Bail Act1977 the Court must refuse bail unless satisfied that exceptional circumstances exist which justify the grant of bail.

In my view, the applicant has failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances. Bail must be refused.

On 5 July 2015, the applicant and two others went to the home of Garry Coulson. An incident there occurred which caused Mr Coulson’s death. On the available evidence it seems tolerably clear that Mr Coulson was struck a number of times with a baseball bat whilst in bed, and was stabbed a number of times, thus suffering injuries which caused his death.

Following police investigation, on 5 August 2015 the applicant was charged with aggravated burglary. Later, on 22 October 2015, the applicant was charged with Mr Coulson’s murder.

There are alternative ways in which the prosecution presently seeks to establish a case of murder against the applicant. First, the prosecution contends that the applicant and the co-accused entered into an agreement or understanding to attack the deceased, knowing that the attack would be carried with murderous intent. Secondly, and alternatively, the prosecution alleges that there was an agreement to, at the very least, assault the deceased, it being probable that the attack upon the deceased would be carried out with murderous intent. Thirdly, and again in the alternative, the prosecution submits that there was an agreement between the co-accused to assault the deceased, in circumstances where injuries were to be intentionally inflicted upon the deceased, sufficient for murder to be made out pursuant to s 3A of the Crimes Act 1958.

I need not recount the circumstances of the alleged offending in detail. It is enough to observe that there is evidence to suggest that the applicant was recruited by a co-accused to go to Mr Coulson’s home and subject him to retribution for an earlier burglary committed by Mr Coulson. The deceased was attacked in his bed by two men, was struck repeatedly with a baseball bat, and, so it seems, was stabbed repeatedly, suffering injuries from which he died. So far as I presently can see, there is evidence capable of satisfying a jury that, whether the applicant was one of the actual attackers or…

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 Hewett (Bail Application)

Details

AGLC: Re Hewett (Bail Application) [2015] VSC 606
Case: [2015] VSC 606
Decision Date: 4 November 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Re Hewett involved an application for bail by the defendant, who was charged with the murder of a man in Melbourne. The application was heard in the Supreme Court of Victoria. The defendant sought bail on the basis that he had no previous criminal history and had expressed remorse for the incident. The prosecution opposed the application, arguing that the gravity of the offence and the potential danger the defendant posed to the community made him unsuitable for bail.

The primary legal issue before the court was whether the exceptional circumstances test for bail was satisfied. The court considered whether the defendant had demonstrated exceptional circumstances that warranted the granting of bail, given the serious nature of the offence. The court also had to weigh the interests of justice, the safety of the community, and the defendant's right to liberty against the prosecution's arguments.

In delivering its decision, the court held that the exceptional circumstances test was not satisfied. The court found that the seriousness of the charge, the risk of reoffending, and the potential danger to the community outweighed the defendant's arguments for bail. The court considered the evidence presented regarding the defendant's background, the circumstances of the offence, and the potential impact of the offence on the victim's family. Ultimately, the court determined that the defendant did not meet the criteria for bail due to the exceptional nature of the circumstances.

As a result of the court's decision, the defendant's application for bail was refused. The defendant remains in custody awaiting trial for the charge of murder.

Orders