Re St - [2021] VSC 379

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA

Not Restricted

AT MELBOURNE

CRIMINAL DIVISION

S ECR 2020 0345

IN THE MATTER of the Bail Act 1977
and
IN THE MATTER of an application for bail ST

---

JUDGE:	COGHLAN JA
WHERE HELD:	Melbourne
DATE OF HEARING:	18 December 2020
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	28 June 2021
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	Re ST
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2021] VSC 379

---

CRIMINAL LAW – Application for bail – Murder – Child applicant – Exceptional circumstances established – No unacceptable risk – Bail granted.

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Applicant	Mr R Edney	Stary Norton Halphen
For the Respondent	Mr M Gibson QC	Ms A Hogan, Solicitor for Public Prosecutions

HIS HONOUR:

By application dated 9 December 2020 ST made application to this court for bail. On 18 December 2020 I granted him bail and said that I would publish my reasons. These are those reasons. These reasons should be read in conjunction with the reasons published for the granting of bail to co-accused AP, IT, NT, DP and JR and the reasons published for granting bail to all VN, AK and CN.

All 11 co-accused have been charged with the murder of Solomone Taufeulungaki (‘the deceased’) at approximately 4.00pm on 16 June 2020. The above accused and the applicant are all children. The two adult accused have not been admitted to bail.

The significant difference relating to ST is that he is alleged to be the person who stabbed the deceased.

Although I accept that there is apparently credible evidence capable of establishing that fact, the question of intent is still open. That is particularly so having regard to his age (15 years old at the time of the offence) and the alleged admission he is said to have made to Alofa Schuster, the mother of the co-accused AP and DP. He is said to have admitted he was the stabber but denied any murderous intent.

I proceed on the basis that this is not necessarily a strong case for murder.

As with the other accused, the procedural history of the matter is that the applicant charged with violent disorder and affray on 17 June 2020. He was released on bail. On 22 October 2020 he was charged with murder and placed on remand.

As the applicant is charged with murder, a Sch 1 offence under the Bail Act 1977 (‘the Act’), he can only be admitted to bail if the Court is ‘satisfied that exceptional circumstances exist that justify the grant of bail’.[1] If the court is so satisfied then bail will still be refused if there is an unacceptable risk that the Applicant would:
[1]Section 4AA of the Bail Act 1977.

(i) Endanger the safety or welfare of any person; or

(ii) Commit an offence while on bail; or

(iii) Interfere with a witness or otherwise obstruct the course of justice in any matter; or

(iv) Fail to surrender into custody in accordance with the conditions of bail.[2]

[2]Section 4E(1)…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read Re St and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2021] VSC 379
Decision Date: 28 June 2021

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The parties involved in this case were St, the applicant, and the Crown. The dispute centred around an application for bail in relation to a charge of murder. The case was heard by the Supreme Court of Victoria. The primary issue before the court was whether exceptional circumstances existed that would justify granting bail to St, who was a child at the time of the application.

The court considered the seriousness of the offence, the likelihood of St appearing in court if released on bail, and whether bail would pose an unacceptable risk to the community. Given the exceptional circumstances presented, including the applicant's age and the nature of the evidence, the court found that there were sufficient grounds to grant bail. The court concluded that the risk to the community was not unacceptable, and that releasing the applicant on bail would not pose a significant threat.

The Supreme Court of Victoria, therefore, granted the application for bail. The court emphasised that the exceptional circumstances, including the age of the applicant and the strength of the evidence, were crucial in making its decision. The court also noted that appropriate bail conditions would be imposed to ensure the safety of the community and the likelihood of the applicant appearing in court.

Orders