Re Sahin

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

S ECR 2024 0265

IN THE MATTER of the Bail Act 1977 (Vic)

AND

IN THE MATTER of an application for bail by Can SAHIN

---

JUDGE:	Elliott J
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	29 November 2024
DATE OF RULING:	29 November 2024
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Re Sahin
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2024] VSC 748

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Bail – Charges of burglary, theft, firearm and other offences – Prima facie entitlement to bail – Whether applicant an unacceptable risk of endangering the safety or welfare of any other person, whether by committing an offence that has that effect or by any other means – Applicant not an unacceptable risk if bail granted for a fixed period – Bail granted for a fixed period – Bail Act 1977 (Vic), ss 1B, 3, 3AAA, 4D, 4E, 5AAA.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the applicant	J Moutsias	Giorgianni & Liang Lawyers
For the respondent	D Coombs	Office of Public Prosecutions

HIS HONOUR:

A. Introduction

On 15 October 2024, an application for bail was filed in this court on behalf of Can Sahin (“Sahin”).
On 4 September 2024, Sahin was arrested and charged in relation to a number of firearm, burglary, theft and other offences he is alleged to have committed between 31 August 2024 and 3 September 2024. He has been on remand since.
At the time of his arrest, Sahin was on bail in relation to a number of other alleged offences and was also the subject of a summons.[1]
[1]Further details of these matters are outlined in pars 33-86 below.
Sahin previously made 2 applications for bail in the Magistrates’ Court of Victoria on 5 September 2024 and 16 October 2024. Both of these applications were refused on the basis that the prosecution had established that Sahin presented an unacceptable risk of endangering the safety or welfare of any other person, whether by committing an offence that has that effect or by any other means.[2]
[2]Bail Act 1977 (Vic), s 4E(1)(a)(i).
In support of his application for bail before this court, it was submitted that any risk associated with a grant of bail could not be considered unacceptable. In that regard, Sahin placed particular weight on the supports available to him as part of the Court Integrated Services Program, as well as proposed conditions of bail and the offer of a bail guarantee to reduce any such risk to an acceptable level.
The application was opposed by the prosecution on the same ground as had previously been established in the Magistrates’ Court, namely that Sahin presented an unacceptable risk of endangering the safety or welfare of any other person.
The matter was originally listed for hearing at 10.00am on 21 November 2024, but was required to be adjourned on that occasion. Consequently, the applicant was remanded in custody for a further week or so until 10.00am today. The principal reason for the matter not proceeding on the previous occasion was that an interpreter was not arranged for Sahin. Sahin’s native language is Turkish and he does not speak English. The court generally requires the prosecution to arrange an interpreter for the applicant if needed in applications such as this. This position was confirmed in an email from the court’s criminal registry to the parties on 13 November 2024. The prosecution apologised for not arranging an interpreter. It was acknowledged that there was an oversight because of a misunderstanding of the email.
For the reasons that follow, bail will be granted for a fixed period.

B. Alleged offending

The following accounts are based on the prosecution case and comprise only allegations at this stage.

B.1 Charges dated 4 September 2024

It is alleged that on 31 August 2024, Sahin attended a residential address listed for sale in Mickleham (“the Mickleham Residence”). Accompanied by a real estate agent, Sahin conducted a walkthrough of the Mickleham Residence.
Conversations between Sahin and the real estate agent were translated by Sahin’s partner by way of a video call using the FaceTime application. Although the walkthrough lasted approximately 15-20 minutes, phone monitoring data in relation to Sahin’s registered mobile telephone number allegedly indicates that he was present within the vicinity of the Mickleham Residence for several hours.
It is alleged that later that day, Sahin and an associate, Beyler Kaya (“Kaya”), forced entry into the Mickleham Residence and surrounding sheds and stole various items of property. The owner of the Mickleham Residence was not present at the time. That property included the owner’s Australian passport, Australian Defence Force service medals, $2,000 in Australian currency, $1,000 in United States currency, keys to the address and outbuildings, a motor vehicle, numerous hand and power tools, and jewellery.
It is alleged that Sahin and Kaya accessed a large exterior garage near the main property, and proceeded to force open a safe and steal 3 firearms from that safe, together with a significant quantity of ammunition, a firearm cleaning kit and an ammunition box.
Closed circuit television located inside the garage allegedly captured footage of Sahin and Kaya present at various times on 31 August 2024 and 1 September 2024.
Sahin was allegedly captured on 31 August 2024 wearing a baseball cap, black puffer jacket, light tracksuit pants and dark shoes with reflective motifs located on the back of the ankles.
On 1 September 2024, at 7.32pm, the same camera allegedly captured Sahin’s face as he searched through the building. It is alleged that when he observed the camera, he momentarily hid inside a nearby room before shining a torch into the lens and knocking it down. It is also alleged that Sahin was wearing the same baseball cap and same dark shoes as on 31 August 2024.

On 1 September 2024, at approximately 4.30pm, a witness drove past the Mickleham Residence. It is alleged that her vehicle dash camera recorded footage of a vehicle registered to Sahin’s partner, being a grey Mercedes-Benz M-Class SUV,[3] parked by the front fence.
[3]That is, a “sport utility vehicle”. While the vehicle is registered to Sahin’s partner, it is allegedly driven regularly by Sahin. It is anticipated that the witness will give evidence that she observed a male inside the vehicle with olive skin and a beard, wearing a hat and sunglasses.
The owner of the Mickleham Residence discovered that items had been stolen when he returned home on 2 September 2024, and immediately reported the incident to police.
On 3 September 2024, at approximately 1.30pm, police intercepted and arrested Sahin in Campbellfield while he was allegedly driving the same grey Mercedes-Benz M-Class SUV captured by the dash camera footage on 1 September 2024. A different associate of Sahin present in the vehicle, Bilal Gurlu (“Gurlu”), was also arrested in relation to alleged possession of a drug of dependence.
Police searched Sahin and seized an Apple iPhone and $3,450 in cash. Subsequent analysis of call and message logs, when compared with what was identified on the physical telephone, allegedly indicate that a number of the communications Sahin had with third parties, including Kaya, were deleted prior to him being arrested by police.
Police also seized Gurlu’s mobile telephone and located an image taken at 2.44am on 3 September 2024 that allegedly depicted 1 of the stolen firearms, the stolen firearm cleaning kit and a quantity of stolen ammunition, as well as the shoes Sahin was arrested wearing which, in turn, allegedly match the shoes he was depicted wearing in the closed circuit television footage from the Mickleham Residence on 31 August and 1 September 2024.[4]
[4]See pars 15-16 above.
On 3 September 2024, police also executed search warrants at Sahin’s partner’s family home, where Sahin and his partner resided, as well as an address next door which had recently been leased to Sahin and his partner.
At the rental property, police found very limited furniture or personal items, with the majority of items still boxed up waiting to be unpacked. The garage however was allegedly found to be full of various allegedly stolen items. Police seized, among other things, 17 women’s jackets with tags, 19 pieces of assorted women’s clothing, 12 pieces of assorted accessories such as hand bags and scarves and identification documents that belonged to the alleged victim of burglaries committed at a residential address in Attwood on 2 and 27 August 2024 (“the Attwood Residence”).[5]
[5]See pars 70-71 and 78-86 below.
From the room that Sahin and his partner occupied at Sahin’s partner’s family home, police seized, among other things, .22 calibre firearm ammunition allegedly matching 1 of the stolen firearms and a fabric bag containing jewellery and watches, with certain items being identified by the owner of the Attwood Residence as belonging to her.[6]
[6]Ibid.
On the same date, at approximately 5.15pm, a firearm prohibition order search was conducted at Gurlu’s home address in Craigieburn. During the search of the garage, police located and seized a .308 calibre firearm ammunition round and a closed circuit television hard drive. It is alleged that the .308 calibre firearm ammunition round matched 1 of the stolen firearms and matched the ammunition round depicted in the photo found on Gurlu’s mobile telephone.[7]
[7]See par 21 above.
Sahin was interviewed by police and denied any knowledge of the incident. On the basis that police had not been able to access closed circuit television footage from the Mickleham Residence at the time of this interview, Sahin was at that time released without charge.
Gurlu was also interviewed and allegedly stated that Sahin had attended his address in the early hours of 3 September 2024 and had at some stage produced the .308 calibre firearm ammunition round. He further stated he did not know how the image came to be on his phone, but that Sahin may have had access to his mobile telephone while present at his address. He was released without charge.
On 4 September 2024, police were able to access the closed circuit television footage and review it. At approximately 10.35am, police attended Sahin’s partner’s family home and arrested Sahin, who was transported to the Broadmeadows police station for interview. While in police custody, Sahin allegedly made certain admissions to police, including that the stolen firearms and ammunition had been sold for a combined total of approximately $1,800.
Sahin was charged with:
(1)Burglary, contrary to section 76(1) of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) on 1 September 2024.
(2)Three charges of theft of a firearm, contrary to section 74AA of the Crimes Act between 31 August 2024 and 1 September 2024.
(3)Theft, contrary to section 74 of the Crimes Act between 31 August 2024 and 1 September 2024.
(4)Knowingly dealing with proceeds of crime, contrary to section 194(2) of the Crimes Act on 3 September 2024.
(5)Possessing cartridge ammunition without a licence, contrary to section 124(1) of the Firearms Act 1996 (Vic) on 3 September 2024.
On 5 September 2024, police attended Kaya’s residential address in Craigieburn for the purpose of executing search warrants. Kaya was arrested and various items were seized, including keys, black shoes, a mobile telephone and a scope allegedly originally attached to 1 of the stolen firearms. Kaya was subsequently transported by police to Broadmeadows police station, interviewed and remanded in custody in relation to the same charges as Sahin.
Police have been unable to locate the majority of stolen property or firearms. However, on 20 September 2024, the Australian passport of the owner of the Mickleham Residence was handed in to police by a third party.[8] They advised that they were walking along Somerton Road, near Greenvale Reservoir Park, when they located the passport in grass and rubbish away from the road.
[8]See par 12 above.
The matter was at that time listed at the Magistrates’ Court on 28 November 2024 for committal mention. Yesterday, the committal hearing was listed at the Magistrates’ Court on 31 January 2025.

B.2 Outstanding matters

As noted above,[9] at the time of Sahin’s arrest on 4 September 2024, he was on bail and the subject of a summons in relation to a number of outstanding matters.
[9]See par 3 above.

B.2.1 Summons dated 29 March 2024

On 29 March 2024, at approximately 5.40am, Sahin and Kaya were arrested by police and charged in relation to alleged theft and handling of stolen goods. Kaya was also charged with possession of a drug of dependence.
Police found Sahin and Kaya sitting in a blue flatbed tow truck at the Western end of Summerhill Road in Craigieburn. They observed a pair of black latex-style gloves discarded beside the driver’s door of the vehicle and asked the pair to exit the vehicle for a conversation. Kaya was allegedly observed attempting to hide something around the centre side of his seat. Police subsequently conducted a search of the vehicle.[10]
[10]Pursuant to s 82 of the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981 (Vic).
Police located and seized multiple pairs of used latex gloves, as well as ski mask style face coverings and a number of smoking implements. Between the driver’s seat and the centre console, police also located a small bag of a clear crystal-like substance, which police suspected to be methylamphetamine.
Police further located a large stainless steel submersible pump with piping, valves and cables still attached to it, which police believed to be stolen goods. Sahin and Kaya were arrested in relation to the suspected stolen goods and transported to Epping police station for interview.
Sahin was released pending summons in relation to 1 charge of theft, contrary to section 74 of the Crimes Act and 1 charge of handling stolen goods, contrary to section 88 of the Crimes Act.
Kaya was released on bail in relation to those same charges, as well as a further charge of possession of a drug of dependence.
Later enquiries allegedly reveal that the property next to where Sahin and Kaya were located has a windmill with a water well likely to have contained the allegedly stolen pump. Police have not been able to identify the owner of that property.
The matter is next listed for mention on 19 December 2024 in the Magistrates’ Court.

B.2.2 Charges dated 2 August 2024

B.2.2.1 Alleged offending on 8 June 2024

It is alleged that on 8 June 2024, at approximately 6.00am, Sahin and Kaya committed a burglary at a construction site in Greenvale.
Closed circuit television allegedly captured Sahin and Kaya arriving in a white Toyota Corolla sedan with a cage trailer attached, exiting the vehicle and then approaching the boundary fence of the construction site.
It is alleged that Sahin can be seen in the footage wearing black pants, a black hooded top, a black beanie and white shoes.
Sahin and Kaya allegedly cut a hole in a wire mesh fence on the western side of the property to gain entry. Whilst on site, they allegedly broke into 7 shipping containers, the site office, a white Toyota Hilux vehicle and a white Isuzu D-MAX vehicle.
Over the next approximately 2 hours, they were allegedly captured travelling to and from the white Toyota Corolla sedan on multiple occasions, carrying a large number of stolen goods and placing them into the rear of the vehicle. They then allegedly departed the area at 8.02am.
A witness allegedly observed Sahin and Kaya placing the items into the car and recognised the white Toyota Corolla sedan and trailer as belonging to a neighbour who resided in the street of Sahin’s partner’s family home.
On both 16 and 17 June 2024, the witness drove past Sahin’s partner’s family home and sighted the white Toyota Corolla sedan and trailer parked on the nature strip outside the address. The witness took photographs of the vehicle which depicted the vehicle’s registration number.
Later enquiries conducted with VicRoads revealed the white Toyota Corolla sedan to be registered to Sahin’s mother.
On 17 June 2024, an employee of the construction site provided police with a list of allegedly stolen items, including 2 laptops and 5 handheld transceivers.

B.2.2.2 Alleged offending on 1 July 2024

It is alleged that on the evening of 1 July 2024, Sahin, Kaya and an unknown male associate committed burglaries of 11 storage units within a storage unit facility in Campbellfield (“the Campbellfield Storage Facility”). It is alleged that both Sahin and Kaya rented storage units at the Campbellfield Storage Facility, and that Sahin used his access card to enter the facility that evening.
Closed circuit television within the Campbellfield Storage Facility allegedly captured Sahin and the unknown male associate arriving in the car park at approximately 9.21pm. They allegedly arrived in the same white Toyota Corolla sedan used in the 8 June 2024 offending.[11] Shortly after, it is alleged that closed circuit television captured Kaya arriving by vehicle and parking behind Sahin and the unknown male associate.
[11]See par 49 above.
At 10.49pm, the 3 men were allegedly captured entering the Campbellfield Storage Facility through a side door. Sahin was allegedly captured wearing a black hooded jumper, black pants and black ‘New York’ cap with a white logo.
It is alleged that once inside the Campbellfield Storage Facility, the 3 men broke into 11 storage units and stole various items, including electronics, clothing, power tools and toys. Four alleged victims have provided police with lists of stolen items from their storage units.
It is further alleged that phone monitoring data in relation to Sahin’s registered mobile telephone number placed Sahin in the direct vicinity of the Campbellfield Storage Facility at the time of the alleged offending.

B.2.2.3 Alleged offending between 19 and 20 July 2024

It is alleged that between 11.45pm on 19 July 2024 and 3.59am on 20 July 2024, Sahin and Kaya committed a burglary of a storage unit within a storage unit facility in Westmeadows (“the Westmeadows Storage Facility”).
Closed circuit television from a nearby fitness centre allegedly captured Sahin and Kaya arriving at the Westmeadows Storage Facility in a dark coloured Mercedes-Benz SUV.[12]
[12]It was not clear on the evidence on this application whether this vehicle is alleged to be the same grey Mercedes-Benz M-Class SUV registered to Sahin’s partner and allegedly used in the offending between 31 August 2024 and 3 September 2024: see par 17 above.
They then allegedly entered the Westmeadows Storage Facility by cutting a hole in the rear fence.
It is alleged that Sahin can be seen on closed circuit television wearing a black cap with a ‘New York’ logo on the front.
Once inside the Westmeadows Storage Facility, Sahin and Kaya allegedly broke into 13 storage units. However, at this time, only 1 alleged victim has reported stolen items (to the value of approximately $30,000).
Closed circuit television from the nearby fitness centre allegedly captured Sahin, at approximately 3.37am, moving the vehicle from the car park space and reversing it towards the entrance of the laneway adjacent to the fitness centre. It is alleged that Sahin and Kaya then proceeded to load the vehicle with stolen items that they had removed from the storage units.
It is further alleged that phone monitoring data in relation to Sahin’s registered mobile telephone number placed Sahin in the direct vicinity of the Westmeadows Storage Facility at the time of the alleged offending.

B.2.2.4 Alleged offending on 26 July 2024

It is alleged that in the early hours of the morning of 26 July 2024, Sahin and Kaya committed burglaries of 3 further storage units within the Westmeadows Storage Facility.

At 2.57am, alarms at the Westmeadows Storage Facility were activated, notifying security.
Security attended and contacted emergency services after confirming that there had been burglaries of storage units. Police subsequently attended and observed that 3 storage units owned by a power tool company had been broken into.
Closed circuit television allegedly captured Sahin and a second male associate, believed to be Kaya, on site at 2.24am that morning and shortly prior to the alarms being activated. Sahin was allegedly captured wearing a black ‘New York’ cap, with a head torch attached and a dark coloured jacket.
Sahin and Kaya were allegedly captured using trolleys to remove various power tools in red boxes, and exiting out a side door at the rear of the Westmeadows Storage Facility.
At 11.50am, police spoke with the manager of the Westmeadows Storage Facility, who confirmed that Sahin rented a storage unit and had a unique passcode which allowed him access through the front gate after hours.
It is further alleged that phone monitoring data in relation to Sahin’s registered mobile telephone number placed Sahin in the direct vicinity of the Westmeadows Storage Facility at the time of the alleged offending.

B.2.2.5 Alleged offending on 2 August 2024

It is alleged that between 5.30am and 2.00pm on 2 August 2024, Sahin and an unknown male associate committed a burglary at, and stole a motor vehicle from, the Attwood Residence.
It is alleged that they entered the Attwood Residence through a rear sliding door that was left unlocked. Once inside, they allegedly stole an Apple iPad, assorted jewellery and sunglasses, various forms of documentation and identification in the name of the alleged victim and her deceased partner, as well as spare car keys to a white Kia Sorrento SUV. They then allegedly left the Attwood Residence in that vehicle.

B.2.2.6 Arrest

On 2 August 2024, Sahin and Kaya were arrested and charged in relation to the alleged offending on 8 June 2024, 1 July 2024, between 19 and 20 July 2024, 26 July 2024 and 2 August 2024.
More specifically, Sahin was charged with:
(1)Burglary, contrary to section 76(1) of the Crimes Act on 8 June 2024.
(2)Eleven charges of burglary, contrary to section 76(1) of the Crimes Act on 1 July 2024.
(3)Burglary, contrary to section 76(1) of the Crimes Act on 20 July 2024.
(4)Three charges of burglary, contrary to section 76(1) of the Crimes Act on 26 July 2024.
(5)Theft of a motor vehicle, contrary to section 74 of the Crimes Act on 2 August 2024.
During searches conducted by police at Sahin’s partner’s family home on 2 August 2024, police located and seized, among other things, the black New York cap Sahin allegedly wore during the alleged offending on 1 July 2024, between 19 and 20 July 2024 and 26 July 2024 and a number of power tools police believe to have been stolen from the 3 storage units owned by the power tool company on 26 July 2024.[13] The white Kia Sorrento SUV allegedly stolen on 2 August 2024 from the Attwood Residence was located in the driveway.[14]
[13]See pars 63-69 above.
[14]See pars 70-71 above.
During searches conducted at Sahin’s storage unit at the Campbellfield Storage Facility, police located and seized various items allegedly stolen from an alleged victim’s storage unit on 1 July 2024,[15] as well as various power tools allegedly stolen from the 3 storage units owned by the power tool company on 26 July 2024.[16]
[15]See pars 51-55 above.
[16]See pars 63-69 above.
During searches conducted at Sahin’s storage unit at the Westmeadows Storage Facility, police located and seized various other items police believe to be the proceeds of crime.
Sahin was released on bail to attend the Broadmeadows Magistrates’ Court for mention on 6 December 2024. His conditions of bail required him to, among other things, not associate with Kaya and comply with a curfew between 9.00pm and 6.00am each day.

B.2.3 Alleged offending on 27 August 2024

It is alleged that on 27 August 2024, at approximately 11.00am, Sahin and Kaya committed a further burglary at the Attwood Residence.
They allegedly parked the grey Mercedes-Benz M-Class SUV[17] near to the Attwood Residence. It is alleged they then exited the vehicle, proceeded down the street toward the Attwood Residence and jumped a fence to gain access to the rear yard.
[17]That police believe was used in the alleged offending between 31 August and 3 September 2024: see par 17 above.
It is then alleged that Sahin and Kaya entered the Attwood Residence. A neighbour allegedly heard noises coming from the Attwood Residence and heard the sliding door open. The neighbour was aware the owner of the Attwood Residence was not home and called emergency services.
Police attended the Attwood Residence and allegedly heard crashing noises coming from the backyard that sounded like a person was jumping the fence. Closed circuit television from a neighbouring address allegedly captured Sahin and Kaya running back up the street the way they had arrived.
Police subsequently attempted to intercept the departing vehicle. The vehicle allegedly failed to pull over, drove on the wrong side of the road and left.
On 27 August 2024, Sahin was interviewed and denied having any involvement. He was released pending summons. He is yet to be charged in relation to this alleged offending.
On 8 October 2024, police attended the same location where the Australian passport of the owner of the Mickleham Residence was found. In a discarded laundry hamper with various other items of rubbish, police located an expired driver’s licence in the name of the owner of the Attwood Residence and a certificate in the name of her deceased partner.[18]
[18]See par 24 above.
Police spoke to the owner of the Attwood Residence, who confirmed that a gold plaque that had been affixed to her partner’s coffin during his funeral had been stolen. A palm print taken from the gold plaque is currently being analysed for identification.
It is alleged that Sahin dumped the stolen property at an unknown time after the alleged burglaries at the Attwood Residence on 2 and 27 August 2024.

C. Sahin’s personal circumstances

Sahin is 35 years old and a permanent resident of Australia. He was born in Istanbul, Turkey and migrated to Australia in 2019. His parents and younger sister live in Sydney.
He completed both primary and secondary schooling in Turkey. Immediately after finishing secondary school, he completed 2 years of a diploma in electronics at the University of Istanbul. Following this, he joined the national military service. He remained in the military between 2008 and 2012.
He married his first wife in 2013. From this relationship, he has a daughter, who is 9 years old. Although this relationship ended in 2018 and his first wife and daughter remain in Turkey, he has reported that, prior to his remand, he communicated with his daughter on a regular basis via the WhatsApp application.
He worked as a sales manager with Calvin Klein between 2013 and 2016. He started his own business in 2016 and sold hunting equipment.
He married his second wife in 2018. They decided to move to Australia in search of a better life when his second wife was pregnant with their daughter. Their daughter was born in Australia and is now 4 and a half years old. Sahin initially worked with his then father-in-law when he arrived in Australia. He has also worked as a bricklayer, carpenter and car detailer.
His second marriage broke down in 2021, and his youngest daughter remains in the care of his second wife. He has contact visitation with his youngest daughter each fortnight.
He commenced a relationship with his current partner in 2021.
He has reported that he commenced the use of illicit substances approximately 3 years ago, around the time of his separation from his second wife. More specifically, he has reported that prior to his remand, he was using methamphetamines once per day, using cannabis every second day and using 3 to 4 grams of cocaine per week. He has also reported drinking alcohol until becoming intoxicated every second day. He had not had any period of abstinence and has never been treated for substance abuse issues.
He has also reported that he has an addiction to gambling and funded this through the money he received selling items from storage containers. He has reported that prior to using methamphetamines, he could attend a pokies venue and limit his financial losses. However, due to this addiction, he had been unable to self-manage his finances.
While he has no mental or physical health related concerns except for asthma, his partner has reported that his mental health declined significantly when his parents and sister moved to New South Wales at the end of 2023, and that there was a noticeable difference in him as his parents had moved interstate without notifying him of their plans to leave Victoria.
He has no prior criminal history.

D. Proposed conditions of bail

In support of his application for bail, Sahin proposed the following conditions, namely that he would:
(1)Reside at [his partner’s family home].
(2)Report to police as directed by the court.
(3)Not contact any witness for the prosecution except for the informant.
(4)Not contact any co-accused.
(5)Not leave the State of Victoria.
(6)Not leave Australia.
(7)Not attend any point of international departure.
(8)Surrender all valid passport and travel documentation and not apply for any other passport or travel document.
(9)Comply with all conditions of the Court Integrated Services Program.
His partner has also offered a bail guarantee in the amount of $10,000. She gave evidence before the court today in relation to her commitment and that of her family to assist Sahin with his grant of bail and addressing the various issues he faces.
During the course of the hearing, further conditions were proposed subject to any conditions imposed by the Court Integrated Services Program, namely to take all reasonably practicable steps to have a ban placed on gambling premises within 5 kilometres of the proposed bail address and to obtain gainful full-time employment.
It was further agreed that Sahin would be required not to drive a motor vehicle and that any grant of bail be only for a period of 10 days to allow appropriate steps to be taken for him to comply with the conditions of bail and the Court Integrated Services Program.

E. Legal principles

It was common ground between the parties that Sahin is prima facie entitled to bail under the Bail Act 1977 (Vic),[19] and is not required to show cause why his continued detention is no longer justified.[20]
[19]As he is not charged with an offence contained in either Sch 1 or Sch 2 of the Bail Act and his application is therefore not subject to a 2-step test: see Bail Act, s 4AA.
[20]Re application for bail by ZS [2018] VSC 153, [14] (Champion J).
Despite that entitlement, the court must refuse bail if the prosecution discharges the burden of establishing that an applicant presents an unacceptable risk of:
(1)endangering the safety or welfare of any person, whether by committing an offence that has that effect or by any other means;
(2)interfering with a witness or otherwise obstructing the course of justice; or
(3)failing to surrender into custody in accordance with their bail undertaking.[21]
[21]Bail Act, ss 4D(b), 4E(1); Re AH [2021] VSC 426, [21] (Jane Dixon J); Re application for bail by ZS [2018] VSC 153, [14] (Champion J).
In considering whether an applicant poses an unacceptable risk, the court must take into account the surrounding circumstances.[22] Such surrounding circumstances include, but are not limited to, the following matters listed in section 3AAA(1):
[22]Ibid, 4E(3)(a).
…
(aa)whether, if the accused were found guilty of the offence with which the accused is charged, it is likely—
(i) that the accused would be sentenced to a term of imprisonment; and
(ii)if so, that the time the accused would spend remanded in custody if bail is refused would exceed that term of imprisonment.
(a)the nature and seriousness of the alleged offending, including whether it is a serious example of the offence;
(b)       the strength of the prosecution case;
(c)       the accused’s criminal history;
(d)the extent to which the accused has complied with the conditions of any earlier grant of bail;
(e)       whether, at the time of the alleged offending, the accused—

(i) was on bail for another offence; or
(ii) was subject to a summons to answer to a charge for another offence; or
…
(g)the accused’s personal circumstances, associations, home environment and background;

…
(i) the availability of treatment or bail support services;
(j)any known view or likely view of an alleged victim of the offending on the grant of bail, the amount of bail or the conditions of bail;
(k)the length of time the accused is likely to spend in custody if bail is refused;
(l) the likely sentence to be imposed should the accused be found guilty of the offence with which the accused is charged;

…

In assessing whether a risk of the kind contemplated under section 4E(1) of the Bail Act is an unacceptable risk, the court must also consider whether the risk may be mitigated by any conditions of bail.[23]
[23]Bail Act, s 4E(3)(b).
Section 5AAA(1) requires the court, when considering the release of an applicant on bail, to impose any conditions it considers will reduce any risk to an acceptable level. A non-exhaustive list of possible conditions is outlined under section 5AAA(4), which relevantly includes attendance upon and participation in a bail support service.[24]
[24]Ibid, s 5AAA(4)(g). A “bail support service” is defined in s 3 as including, relevantly, bail support programs.
More broadly, in interpreting and applying the Bail Act, the court is required to take into account the guiding principles set out in section 1B. These include competing considerations of maximising the safety of the community, and the presumption of innocence and the right to liberty.[25]

F. Submissions

[25]Re Ceylan [2018] VSC 361, [31]-[32] (Beach JA).

F.1 Sahin’s submissions

On behalf of Sahin, the following factors were relied upon in support of his application for bail:
(1)The nature and seriousness of the alleged offending.[26] It was conceded on Sahin’s behalf that the alleged offending is serious and has had upsetting consequences for those who have been victims, including items of significant financial and sentimental value being stolen. However, it was submitted that:
[26]Bail Act, s 3AAA(1)(a).
(a)It is in the “mid-range” in respect of this type of offending.
(b)The Bail Act has been recently amended, such that a risk of simply offending while on bail is no longer enough to create an unacceptable risk. To meet the test, offending must (relevantly) endanger the safety and welfare of others in the community (whether that involves an applicant committing an offence that has that effect or by any other means). Although property-related offences are serious, there has not been a direct threat to the safety or welfare of any person. Consequently, it was submitted that no unacceptable risk is enlivened in the circumstances of this case.
(c)A distinction can be drawn between Sahin’s alleged offending and the examples provided in the notes to section 4E of the Bail Act of the types of offences that might constitute unacceptable risk, including aggravated burglary, armed robbery and carjacking.
(d)While it was acknowledged that the firearms offences in particular are highly serious and create a significant danger to the community, the mere presence of this risk, in and of itself, does not necessitate Sahin’s continued detention.
(2)His lack of prior criminal history.[27] While there are a number of outstanding matters, all alleged offending has occurred within a 5-month period. It was submitted that this is to be contrasted with Sahin’s previously lawful existence. It was conceded on Sahin’s behalf that he was on bail at the time of this alleged offending. However, it was noted that there was no treatment condition in place at that time, and that such a condition now being proposed was a significant distinction in assessing the risk that he poses.
[27]Ibid, s 3AAA(1)(c).
(3)In this regard, the availability of the Court Integrated Services Program, specifically intensive case management through the indictable crime stream of the Court Remand Outreach Pilot.[28] It was submitted that the availability of this program afforded Sahin a previously unrealised opportunity to address the apparent underlying causes of offending behaviour, and that this is a significant consideration in determining risk that should not be understated, particularly in relation to the allegation that Sahin is driven to crime to fund drug use and gambling. As part of this program, Sahin would:
[28]Ibid, s 3AAA(1)(i).
(a)Attend his first Court Integrated Services Program appointment at 2.00pm on 2 December 2024. He would be supported in exploring his readiness for alcohol or other drug treatment, or both, and discuss appropriate referral pathways and treatment options. He could be referred through local community-based services or access assessment and standard counselling. He would also be provided with a list of numbers he could call for additional alcohol and other drug support in the interim.
(b)Be encouraged to contact gamblers help for free phone call confidential advice, and then explore what support he would prefer between online, over the phone or one on one counselling to address ongoing gambling problems.
(c)Although he has not reported any mental health concerns, he has expressed a willingness to explore mental health treatment if his legal representative identified it as a concern. If so, he would be supported in coordinating and scheduling appointments for a mental health assessment.
(4)Kaya, Sahin’s co-accused, is currently on remand, thereby reducing the risk of him committing further offences.
(5)His vulnerability in custody.[29] It is his first time in custody and he does not speak English. As such, it was submitted he has found day-to-day life in custody more onerous. He has expressed feelings of shame being in custody for the first time and the impact his remand has had on his family.
(6)Delay.[30] The matter is listed for committal on 31 January 2025. The charges will be contested. Consequently, it is likely that a trial will not be listed until at least early 2026. It was submitted that pre-trial custody may amount to approximately 18 months to 2 years.
(7)In light of the above delay, the time spent on remand could amount to the same as or exceed the likely sentence imposed.[31] Reference was made to his Honour Nettle JA’s decision in Hanna v the Director of Public Prosecutions,[32] in which his Honour expressed the view that “there may… be cases in which a grant of bail is warranted for no more reason than that the likely period of delay is as much or even a significant fraction of the likely non-parole period.[33] Reference was also made to Sentencing Advisory Council Statistics that in the 5 years to 30 June 2023, there were 114 charges for theft of a firearm. The shortest prison sentence was less than 1 month and the longest was 3.5 years. Half of the prison sentences were below 1.1 years. Other sentences included community correction orders. It was submitted that Sahin’s time on remand could exceed any term of imprisonment ultimately imposed in light of his lack of any criminal history, community supports and the absence of aggravating factors including violence.
(8)The availability of stable accommodation.[34] It was submitted that he would have stable accommodation available to him at his partner’s family home, and his partner is willing to continue to support him.
(9)It was submitted that Sahin had been completing job applications while on remand and may have employment available to him upon or shortly after his release from custody.[35]
[29]Ibid, s 3AAA(1)(g)-(h).
[30]Ibid, s 3AAA(1)(k).
[31]Ibid, s 3AAA(1)(aa).
[32]Unreported, Supreme Court of Victoria, 9 May 2008.
[33]Ibid, [14], cited with approval in Re Haddara [2014] VSC 284, [16(d)] (Hollingworth J).
[34]Ibid, s 3AAA(1)(g).
[35]Ibid.

It was also submitted that it would be possible to sufficiently mitigate any risk associated with a grant of bail by the imposition of appropriate conditions and with a bail guarantee from Sahin’s partner in the amount of $10,000.

F.2 Prosecution submissions

In turn, the prosecution submitted that Sahin presented an unacceptable risk of endangering the safety or welfare of any other person, whether by committing an offence that has that effect or by any other means. In this regard, reference was made to:
(1)The nature and seriousness of the alleged offending. It was submitted that:
(a)Sahin has shown a sudden and rapid escalation in offending that has now seen him allegedly conduct surveillance on a residential property in order to commit a burglary.[36] As a result, he has allegedly stolen 3 firearms and numerous items of significant financial and sentimental value. In the alleged burglaries at the Attwood Residence, sentimental items from the owner’s deceased husband were stolen, including the coffin plaque displayed on his casket at his funeral. Jewellery he gifted to her before her passing was also taken, as well as items of no real financial value, such as award certificates in his name.
[36]Being a reference to the Mickleham Residence.
(b)As a direct result of his alleged offending, 3 firearms and ammunition are likely circulating in the community. It is unknown who is in possession of these firearms and there is no way to alleviate the risk that will likely place members of the wider community in significant danger. Alternatively, Sahin may still have direct access to illegal firearms if granted bail.
(c)It is of concern that despite not possessing a driver’s licence, it appears that Sahin had been driving extensively.[37]
[37]Sahin holds an international driver’s licence, but not a Victorian driver’s licence.
(2)The strength of the prosecution case.[38] It was submitted that there is a complete sufficiency of evidence in relation to the matters alleged against Sahin, including in relation to closed circuit television footage and Sahin’s mobile telephone.
(3)Although Sahin has no prior criminal history, he has outstanding charges which have accumulated quickly. The most recent alleged offending between 31 August 2024 and 3 September 2024 is aggravated by the fact that it was allegedly committed whilst Sahin was on bail for similar alleged offending.[39] It was submitted that this is indicative of Sahin’s lack of regard for the opportunity of being placed on bail. It was further submitted that the proposed conditions of bail would not mitigate the risk, as he has disregarded the opportunity previously afforded to him.
(4)The likelihood of further offending in circumstances where Sahin is allegedly primarily driven to crime to fund significant expensive habits in relation to both drugs of dependence and gambling.
(5)Known views of victims.[40] It was submitted that the harm caused to the community by the alleged offending has been extensive. For example, the owner of the Attwood Residence has expressed that she has not been emotionally capable of returning to her property after the incidents and as a result has been residing with her daughter in Yarraville.
(6)The likelihood of a sentence of imprisonment being imposed.[41] It was submitted that Sahin is highly likely to receive a term of imprisonment if found guilty, given the seriousness of the charges and the fact that he will lose any sentencing discount if the charges are proven at the completion of a contested hearing.
(7)The prosecution accepted that Sahin had the Court Integrated Services Program available to him upon release from custody and that this was relevant to the question of whether an unacceptable risk existed. However, it was submitted that what was offered was support “to explore his readiness for alcohol and/or other drug treatment and discuss appropriate referral pathways and treatment options” and did not provide sufficient certainty in relation to treatment. This assessment did not describe Sahin as being ready for any form of appropriate treatment, nor did it offer immediate access to a detailed program for him to undertake on at least a full time basis, if not a residential program with compliance obligations. Apart from a first appointment, there appeared to be no other obligations that Sahin would be required to undertake under this program. It was further submitted that because Sahin does not hold a driver’s licence, his partner would be required to take him to any physical appointments and this would likely prove difficult given her work commitments, as well as commitments in respect of her role as a carer for her mother.
(8)The proposed bail address is not suitable in circumstances where Sahin was living at that address at the time of the alleged offending. In addition, in light of his partner’s care responsibilities, it was submitted that it is unlikely she could effectively monitor Sahin’s compliance with bail conditions. Moreover, it was submitted that his partner, when allegedly acting as an interpreter to assist Sahin with the walkthrough of the Mickleham Residence, must have known that she and Sahin had no ability to purchase a property listed for sale at $2,500,000, but still aided him. While police have not charged her regarding any alleged involvement, it was submitted her participation further indicated that she would be unable to prevent him acting illegally.
(9)He has no employment or source of income, and this is relevant to the risk of him committing further offences to fund his gambling and drug habits.
(10)While the bail guarantee amount of $10,000 is significant, it was offered as part of the previous applications for bail in the Magistrates’ Court by way of a loan to be paid back to family over no specific timeframe, with a smaller portion of the money offered Sahin’s partner herself. In addition, the prosecution expressed concern about Sahin’s partner’s ability to pay the bail guarantee in circumstances where she works part time as a hairdresser and obtains Centrelink payments as a carer for her mother.
[38]Ibid, s 3AAA(1)(b).
[39]Ibid, s 3AAA(1)(d) and (e)(i)-(ii).
[40]Ibid, s 3AAA(1)(j).
[41]Ibid, s 3AAA(1)(aa)(i), (k) and (l).
As to the last of these matters, evidence was given by Sahin’s partner today, which was not challenged, of the circumstances in which the money would be provided and that the $10,000 is presently available.

G. Consideration

Having considered each party’s submissions, and the surrounding circumstances more generally, it is appropriate that bail be granted for a short period of time.
I have little doubt that spending some time incarcerated for the very first time has had a salutary effect on Sahin. I have been persuaded that it is appropriate to grant bail, given he has now expressed a willingness to get help. In light of the risks, and the lack of certainty with respect to the supports available to him, I am only going to grant bail for a short period of time. This is so he can satisfy me that he will act in accordance with what he has expressed and that he will put appropriate measures in place to deal with the rehabilitation he clearly requires to address both his substance and gambling issues. This short period gives him the ability to demonstrate his intentions and actions in that regard. Furthermore, bail will only be granted on stringent conditions.
A key factor in deciding to grant bail has been the considerable family support that has been demonstrated today. It is clear that his partner’s family are willing to assist in addressing the issues that he faces.

H. Conclusion

For the reasons outlined above, the prosecution has failed to establish that, with the appropriate conditions of bail put in place, Sahin would present an unacceptable risk.
Accordingly, orders will be made today granting Sahin bail until 10.00am on 11 December 2024 subject to the following conditions:[42]
[42]The prosecution had submitted that, in light of the risks, bail should not be granted today, being a Friday before a weekend and should instead be granted next Monday, 2 December 2024. However, I was not prepared to delay Sahin’s release on bail, particularly in circumstances where it is important that he is able to attend his first court integrated services program appointment on 2 December 2024.
1. The applicant is admitted to bail until 10.00am on 11 December 2024 on his own undertaking, and with a bail guarantee from [Sahin’s partner] in the amount of $10,000, on the following conditions, namely that he must:
(1)Reside at [his partner’s family home] (“the Residence”).
(2)Not change his place of residence without leave of the court.
(3)Report to the officer in charge of the Craigieburn police station, or her or his nominee, once every Monday, Wednesday and Friday between the hours of 6.00am and 8.00pm.
(4)Not leave the Residence between the hours of 8.00pm and 6.00am each day (“the Curfew Hours”), except in the case of a medical emergency.
(5)Present at the front door of the Residence during the Curfew Hours upon the reasonable request of the informant, Detective Senior Constable [name], or his nominee, being an authorised member of Victoria Police.
(6)Attend upon and comply with all lawful directions of the Court Integrated Services Program.
(7)Attend an initial in-take appointment with the Court Integrated Services Program located at 2/350 Queen Street, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, at 2.00pm on 2 December 2024, unless otherwise directed by the Court Integrated Services Program.
(8)Take all reasonably practicable steps to exclude himself from all licensed online wagering providers in Australia by registering with BetStop, the national self-exclusion register.
(9)Not attend any licensed gaming venue within a 5 kilometre radius of the Residence.
(10)Take all reasonably practicable steps to obtain gainful employment.
(11)Not drive a motor vehicle.
(12)Not use or possess any drug of dependence as defined in the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981 (Vic), without lawful authorisation under that Act.
(13)Not possess any firearm as defined in the Firearms Act 1996 (Vic).
(14)Not have any contact with, or seek to contact, any witness for the prosecution, whether directly or indirectly, other than the informant.
(15)Not have any contact with, or seek to contact, any co-accused, including Beyler Kaya and Bilal Gurlu, whether directly or indirectly.
(16)Not possess or use more than 1 mobile telephone.
(17)Provide the informant or his nominee with the telephone number, international mobile equipment identity (“IMEI”) number and subscriber identification module (“SIM”) card number of any mobile telephone he possesses or uses, within 24 hours of first having access to that mobile telephone.
(18)Not leave the State of Victoria.
(19)Not attend any port, airport or international point of departure.
(20)Surrender any current passport or any interstate or international travel documents in his possession or control to the informant or his nominee within 24 hours of the date of these orders.
(21)Not apply for any passport or any interstate or international travel documents or cause, whether directly or indirectly, any other person to do so on his behalf.
(22)Attend the Supreme Court of Victoria at Melbourne at 10.00am on 11 December 2024 and there surrender himself and not depart without leave of the court, and if leave is given, return at the time specified by the court and again surrender himself into custody.

[2024] VSC 748

29 November 2024