Re JB - [2024] VSC 549

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

S ECR 2024 0169

Between:
JB	Applicant
-and-
VICTORIA POLICE	Respondent

---

JUDGE:	Croucher J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING & ORDERS:	1 August 2024
DATE OF WRITTEN REASONS:	6 September 2024
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Re JB
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2024] VSC 549

---

CRIMINAL LAW — Application for bail — Applicant charged with inter alia car theft, attempted armed robbery, armed robbery, and aggravated burglary — Offences allegedly committed while applicant on bail and summons on numerous other charges — Whether exceptional circumstances justifying bail — Whether, if bailed, unacceptable risk of endangering safety or welfare of others — Applicant aged 16 — When applicant previously on bail on three occasions, supported by Youth Justice — No prior convictions or findings of guilt — Applicant on remand in youth justice centre for 45 days — Unlikely to be sentenced to a further period of youth detention — High risk of preventative detention if not bailed — Suitable for Youth Justice Intensive Supervised Bail Program — Other conditions of bail proposed — Particular considerations applicable to bail application by child — Exceptional circumstances established — Asserted risks not unacceptable — Bail granted on own undertaking with conditions— Bail Act 1977 (Vic), ss 3AAA, 3B, 4, 4AA, 4A, 4D & 4E.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Applicant	Ms T. Casey	Shanelle Veit Lawyers
For the Respondent	Mr J.J. Jassar	Victoria Police

HIS HONOUR:

Overview

On 1 August 2024, JB, aged 16, made an application for bail in this Court.[1] He was arrested on 17 June 2024 and charged by Senior Constable Cameron Banks with offences including car theft,[2] attempted armed robbery,[3] armed robbery,[4] and knowingly dealing with proceeds of crime.[5] He has been in custody for 45 days in a youth justice centre since that arrest.
[1]The applicant is described by use of the randomly chosen letters JB because he was under the age of 18 at the time of alleged offending.
[2]Contrary to the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic), s 74.
[3]Contrary to the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic), ss 75A and 321M.
[4]Contrary to the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic), s 75A.
[5]Contrary to the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic), s 194(2).

Despite some confusion initially, it became apparent that JB was also on remand on charges laid by Detective Acting Sergeant Marc Callegaro alleging offences of aggravated burglary[6] and theft committed on 9 June 2024.[7] It was therefore agreed at the hearing that the bail application was made in relation to both matters.
[6]Contrary to the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic), s 77(1).
[7]I was informed by the parties that, with respect to this alleged offending, the last order of the relevant Children’s Court indicated that JB was on remand. However, the Children’s Court had told the parties the day before this hearing that this was in error and the matter should be on summons.

After hearing evidence and submissions, I gave brief ex tempore reasons…

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 JB

Details

AGLC: Re JB [2024] VSC 549
Case: [2024] VSC 549
Decision Date: 6 September 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Re JB involved an application for bail for a 16-year-old boy, JB, who was facing multiple serious charges including car theft, attempted armed robbery, armed robbery, and aggravated burglary. These offences were alleged to have been committed while JB was already on bail and subject to a summons for numerous other charges. The court was required to determine whether there were exceptional circumstances justifying bail, and whether bail would pose an unacceptable risk to the safety or welfare of others. Given the severity of the charges and the fact that JB had been on bail previously on three occasions, supported by Youth Justice, the court also needed to consider the risk of preventative detention if bail was not granted, as well as the suitability of JB for the Youth Justice Intensive Supervised Bail Program.

The court considered the specific factors relevant to bail applications involving children, including the risk of preventative detention and the suitability for a supervised bail program. It found that exceptional circumstances were established, as JB had no prior convictions or findings of guilt and was unlikely to be sentenced to further youth detention. The court also determined that the risks posed by bail were not unacceptable, given the proposed conditions, which included residing at a specified address, complying with the Youth Justice Intensive Bail Program, observing a curfew, and refraining from contact with co-accused and prosecution witnesses.

JB's application for bail was granted on his own undertaking, subject to a series of conditions designed to mitigate any potential risk to public safety while allowing JB to prepare for his defence. These conditions included restrictions on his movements, mandatory school attendance, and adherence to a curfew. The court emphasised the importance of these conditions in ensuring that JB could participate in his legal proceedings without posing an unacceptable risk to the community.

The final order was that JB be admitted to bail on his own undertaking and subject to the specified conditions, including residence, curfew, and restrictions on contact and movement. JB was also required to appear in court on a specified date, as well as any subsequent dates as directed by the court.

Orders

Orders of the court

58. Accordingly, I order that JB be admitted to bail on his own undertaking and on the conditions that he:

(a) is to reside at [redacted] (“the residence”);

(b) is to comply with all lawful directions of the Youth Justice Intensive Bail Program;

(c) is not to leave his residence between 9:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. unless in the company of a parent (“the curfew hours”);

(d) is to present himself at the door of the residence during the curfew hours, if requested to do so by a member of Victoria Police;

(e) is not to contact, or associate with, any co-accused, including [redacted], except in so far as such contact or association may arise at Youth Justice appointments or at school;

(f) is not to contact witnesses for the prosecution, save for the informants;

(g) is to attend [a nominated secondary school] or an alternative school program as required or directed by [the nominated secondary school] and/or as directed by Youth Justice; and

(h) is to appear at [redacted] Children’s Court at 9:15 a.m. on 15 August 2024, and thereafter as directed by that court.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.