Re Lacey (Bail Application) - [2015] VSC 611

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

S CR 2015 0159

IN THE MATTER of the Bail Act 1977

and

IN THE MATTER of an Application for Bail by ANDREW DAVID LACEY

---

JUDGE:	PRIEST JA
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	5 November 2015
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	5 November 2015
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Re Lacey (Bail Application)
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2015] VSC 611

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Bail – Murder – No exceptional circumstances – bail refused.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Crown	Mr P Stefanovic	Office of Public Prosecutions
For the Accused	Mr A Malik	Victoria Legal Aid

HIS HONOUR:

The applicant, who is aged 22 years, is charged with murder. He seeks bail from this Court. 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 opinion, the applicant has failed to satisfy the burden of demonstrating exceptional circumstances. Bail must therefore be refused.

There is evidence that on 5 July 2015, the applicant and two others went to Garry Coulson’s home. It seems plain that whilst he was in bed, Mr Coulson was struck a number of times with a baseball bat and was stabbed a number of times. He died from the injuries he received.

After a police investigation, the applicant was charged with aggravated burglary on 3 August 2015. He was subsequently charged with Mr Coulson’s murder on 22 October 2015.

The prosecution contends that a charge of murder might be established in one of three alternative ways. First, it is argued that the applicant and the co-accused entered into an agreement or understanding to attack the deceased, knowing that the attack would be carried out with murderous intent; secondly, it is contended that there was an agreement to, at the least, assault the deceased, it being probable that the attack upon the deceased would be carried out with murderous intent; and, thirdly, it is submitted 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.

It is unnecessary to describe the circumstances of the alleged offending in any great detail. There is evidence available, however, from which it might be inferred that the applicant was recruited by a co-accused to go to Mr Coulson’s home and subject him to a form of payback for an antecedent burglary committed by Mr Coulson. The deceased was attacked by two men, was struck repeatedly with a baseball bat and was stabbed several times. He suffered injuries from which he died. Whether or not the evidence is capable of establishing that the applicant was one of the actual attackers, there is evidence that he went to Mr Coulson’s premises so that the deceased could be subjected to an assault,…

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 Lacey (Bail Application)

Details

AGLC: Re Lacey (Bail Application) [2015] VSC 611
Case: [2015] VSC 611
Decision Date: 5 November 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Re Lacey, the applicant sought bail in relation to a charge of murder. The application was heard by the Supreme Court of Victoria. The applicant, Lacey, was accused of the brutal murder of a 14-year-old girl, involving acts of extreme violence, including stabbing and blunt force trauma. The application was brought before the court on the basis that the applicant should be granted bail due to the length of the pre-trial period and the potential for adverse effects on the applicant’s mental health.

The court was required to consider the seriousness of the offence and whether exceptional circumstances existed that warranted the granting of bail. The primary legal issue was whether the applicant could demonstrate exceptional circumstances that would justify bail despite the gravity of the charge. The court needed to weigh the presumption in favour of bail, the principles of justice, and the rights of the victim and the community against the potential hardship to the applicant if bail was denied.

The court found that the gravity of the offence and the nature of the violence involved were significant factors against granting bail. The court held that there were no exceptional circumstances present that would warrant a departure from the general rule that bail should be denied in cases of serious violence. The court emphasised the need to protect the community and the rights of the victim. The application for bail was therefore refused. The court concluded that the seriousness of the offence and the potential risk to the community if the applicant were released on bail outweighed any potential hardship to the applicant. The court's decision was based on a careful assessment of the evidence and the legal principles applicable to bail applications in cases involving serious violence.

Orders