Re McKenzie

The case of Re McKenzie involved an application for bail by the applicant, who was facing charges related to serious organised crime. The Supreme Court was tasked with deciding whether there had been a material change in circumstances warranting a reconsideration of the earlier refusal of bail. The applicant argued that additional evidence, including witness statements and information about the complainant’s injuries, should lead to a reassessment of the risk factors involved in granting bail. The prosecution maintained that the new evidence did not significantly alter the circumstances upon which the original bail denial was based, and that the risks associated with releasing the applicant on bail remained unacceptably high.

The court examined the additional evidence provided, particularly focusing on the nature and extent of the complainant’s injuries. While it was revealed that the complainant's injuries were managed without surgery and he had discharged himself against medical advice, the applicant's argument that this undermined the severity of the grievous bodily harm charge was not accepted. The court found that the seriousness of the alleged offending and the associated risks remained unchanged, and the new evidence did not mitigate the risks sufficiently to warrant bail. The applicant’s connection to a bikie gang and the threatening conduct alleged against him were critical factors that continued to pose significant risks if he were released on bail.

The court concluded that the new material did not justify a change in the bail decision. The risk of interference with the complainant and the potential for further serious offending remained high. Consequently, the court dismissed the application for bail, maintaining the applicant in custody to protect the complainant and the community. The court’s decision underscored the gravity of the alleged offending and the persistent risks associated with granting bail in such circumstances.