Re Okuman (Bail Application) - [2025] VSC 541

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

S ECR 2025 0158

IN THE MATTER of the Bail Act 1977

-and-

IN THE MATTER of an application for bail by MEHMET ALI OKUMAN

BETWEEN:

MEHMET ALI OKUMAN	Applicant
v
VICTORIA POLICE	Respondent

---

JUDGE:	Gorton J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	1 September 2025
DATE OF RULING:	2 September 2025
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Re Okuman (Bail Application)
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2025] VSC 541

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Application for bail – Where applicant alleged to have murdered son with schizoaffective disorder and threatened family members – Whether exceptional circumstances test satisfied – Where applicant has no criminal history or past failure to comply with bail conditions – Where alleged offending occurred in unusual circumstances and unlikely to be repeated – Where surety is offered – Where there are triable issues – Where period likely spent on remand substantial but not uncommon – Where applicant has accommodation available – Whether unacceptable risk the applicant would interfere with a witness or obstruct cause of justice – Where primary witnesses’ concerns of interference lack substantive detail – Where imposition of bail conditions will mitigate risk – Bail granted - Re CT [2018] VSC 559 – Re Politis [2019] VSC 780 – Re Pham [2024] VSC 143 – R v Cox [2003] VSC 245 – Re Foxwell [2013] VSC 716 – Bail Act 1977 (Vic), ss 4A(1A), 4E.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Applicant	Mr Sam Tovey	Milides Lawyers
For the Respondent	Ms Jelena Malobabic	Office of Public Prosecutions

HIS HONOUR:

A Background

The applicant, Mr Mehmet Ali Okuman, is a 53 year old man who migrated to Australia from Turkey when he was an infant. He is alleged to have committed a series of offences on 25 January 2025 including the murder by stabbing of his 33-year old son, Gokhan Okuman, the deceased, and to have assaulted and threatened his wife Songul Akbulut (from whom he was amicably separated but to whom he remains married) and his daughter Sinem Okuman. Mr Okuman has applied for bail.
Murder is a Schedule 1 offence,[1] so I am required to refuse bail unless the applicant can persuade me that ‘exceptional circumstances exist that justify the grant of bail’.[2] In considering whether exceptional circumstances exist that justify the grant of bail, I must take into account the ‘surrounding circumstances’.[3] The surrounding circumstances are ‘all the circumstances that are relevant to the matter’ and include: whether the accused would be sentenced to a term of imprisonment and, if so, whether the time the accused would spend remanded in custody if bail is refused would exceed that term of imprisonment; the nature and seriousness of the alleged offending; the strength of the prosecution case; the applicant’s criminal history; the extent to which the applicant has complied with the conditions of any earlier grant of bail; whether there is in force a family violence intervention order against the applicant; the availability of…

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 Okuman (Bail Application)

Details

AGLC: Re Okuman (Bail Application) [2025] VSC 541
Case: [2025] VSC 541
Decision Date: 2 September 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The applicant in this matter sought bail following an allegation of murdering their son and threatening family members. The matter was heard in the County Court of Victoria. The applicant, who has no prior criminal history and has demonstrated a capacity to comply with bail conditions, is alleged to have committed the offence in the context of a mental health crisis. The court was required to consider whether the exceptional circumstances test was satisfied, taking into account the unusual circumstances of the alleged offence, the lack of a criminal history, the availability of a surety, and the existence of triable issues. Furthermore, the court had to assess the risk of interference with witnesses or obstruction of justice, and whether any such risk could be mitigated by the imposition of appropriate bail conditions.

The court examined the evidence presented regarding the applicant's mental health, the circumstances of the alleged offence, and the potential for reoffending. The court noted the lack of a criminal history and the absence of any past failures to comply with bail conditions, which supported the applicant's suitability for bail. The court also considered the substantial but not uncommon period the applicant was likely to spend on remand, the availability of accommodation, and the primary witnesses' concerns, albeit lacking in substantive detail, about potential interference. The court held that the imposition of appropriate bail conditions would mitigate any risk of interference with witnesses or obstruction of justice.

Having considered all relevant factors, the court determined that the exceptional circumstances test was satisfied. The court acknowledged the unusual circumstances of the alleged offence and the potential for the applicant to comply with bail conditions. The court granted bail, subject to conditions aimed at mitigating any risk of interference with witnesses or obstruction of justice. The court found that the applicant's mental health issues, coupled with the availability of accommodation and the support of a surety, provided sufficient assurances that the applicant would comply with bail conditions and not pose an unacceptable risk to the community. The court also considered the likelihood of a substantial period spent on remand and the presence of triable issues as factors supporting the grant of bail.

The final orders of the court included granting bail to the applicant, subject to the conditions specified, which included residence restrictions, regular reporting to a bail justice, and refraining from contact with the primary witnesses. The court also ordered the applicant to surrender any travel documents and refrain from leaving Victoria without the court's permission. The court set a future date for a directions hearing to manage the progression of the case.

Orders