Re Jones (Bail Application) - [2025] VSC 618

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

S ECR 2025 0231

ANN MAREE JONES	Applicant
v
VICTORIA POLICE	Respondent

---

JUDGE:	Gorton J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	29 September 2025
DATE OF RULING:	29 September 2025
DATE OF REASONS:	30 September 2025
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Re Jones (Bail Application)
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2025] VSC 618

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Application for bail – Applicant charged with offences including aggravated burglary and theft whilst on bail – Where applicant has history of aggravated burglary, theft and failure to answer bail offences – Whether exceptional circumstances exist that justify grant of bail - Where applicant is vulnerable and pregnant Aboriginal woman – Exceptional circumstances exist – Whether unacceptable risk that if granted bail may commit Schedule 1 or Schedule 2 offences or endanger safety or welfare of other persons - Where aggravated burglary does not involve allegations of violence – Where no history of physical violence - Where thefts may endanger safety and welfare of other persons notwithstanding lack of physical violence - Where triable issues – Where applicant has access to stable accommodation – Where applicant has access to culturally-appropriate prenatal treatment and drug and alcohol counselling – Where Court Integrated Services Program recommends the applicant for case management – Risk is acceptable with imposition of bail conditions – Bail Act 1977 (Vic) ss 3AAA, 4AA, 4A.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Applicant	Ms Brittany Jeffs	Law and Advocacy Centre for Women
For the Respondent	Ms Belinda Cowley	Victoria Police

HIS HONOUR:

A Introduction

Ann Maree Jones, the applicant, is a 44 year old Barkindji woman who is around 14 weeks’ pregnant with her eleventh child. On 29 September 2025, I granted her bail, on conditions, in respect of charged crimes alleged to have been committed on 8 July 2025[1] and 21 August 2025, and said I would publish reasons for doing so later. These are those reasons.
[1]There was some uncertainty as to whether the applicant was already on bail, or was seeking bail, for the offences alleged to have been committed on 8 July 2025. My decision and reasoning would have been the same if the applicant were already on bail for the offences alleged to have been committed on 8 July 2025.
The applicant is already on bail on charges for offences alleged to have been committed on 23 November 2023, 14, 22, 23, 26 and 28 December 2024, 30 January 2025, 27 February 2025, 14, 18, 19, 20 and 27 March 2025, 9 and 10 April 2025, and 28 May 2025, though I am told there is an as yet undetermined application to revoke bail on those charges presently before the Heidelberg Magistrates’ Court. A number of these charges have ‘resolved’, in that she intends to plead guilty to them. She is also on summons on charges for offences alleged to have been committed on 17 September 2024 and 18 November 2024.

B The alleged offending for…

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 Jones (Bail Application)

Details

AGLC: Re Jones (Bail Application) [2025] VSC 618
Case: [2025] VSC 618
Decision Date: 29 September 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The bail application in Re Jones was heard in the County Court of Victoria. The applicant, who is a pregnant Aboriginal woman, is currently on bail and has been charged with multiple offences including aggravated burglary and theft. The applicant has a history of similar offences and has previously failed to answer bail. The primary legal issue before the court was whether exceptional circumstances existed that would justify granting the applicant bail, despite her criminal history and the nature of the current charges. Additionally, the court needed to determine whether there was an unacceptable risk that if granted bail, the applicant might commit further offences or endanger the safety or welfare of others.

The court examined the nature of the current charges, which included aggravated burglary but did not involve allegations of violence. The applicant's history did not include any incidents of physical violence. However, the court acknowledged that the theft charges could potentially endanger the safety and welfare of other persons, even in the absence of physical violence. The court also considered that there were triable issues in relation to the charges. The applicant had access to stable accommodation and culturally-appropriate prenatal treatment, as well as drug and alcohol counselling. Furthermore, the Court Integrated Services Program recommended that the applicant be subject to case management. The court concluded that while the risk was present, it could be managed through the imposition of appropriate bail conditions.

Given the exceptional circumstances, the court found that it was appropriate to grant bail. The court imposed conditions aimed at mitigating the risks, including regular check-ins with a case manager, adherence to a curfew, and participation in specified treatment programs. The court determined that these conditions would sufficiently address the risk of further offending or endangerment to others. The applicant was therefore granted bail pending the resolution of the charges.

Orders