Boskovic v Commissioner of Police HC Auckland CRI-2004-004-8257

[2005] NZHC 1667

IN THE HIGH COURT OF NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND REGISTRY

CRI-2004-004-8257

EDIN BOZZ BOSKOVIC

Applicant

v

THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE

Respondent

Hearing:         8 April 2005 Appearances: M Lowe for Applicant

B Tantrum for Respondent Judgment:  8 April 2005

JUDGMENT OF COURTNEY J ON APPLICATION FOR BAIL

Solicitors:           M Lowe, P O Box 941, Auckland

Fax: [phone] – Email: [email protected]

Meredith Connell, P O Box 2213, Auckland Fax: [phone]

BOSKOVIC V THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE HC AK CRI-2004-004-8257 [8 April 2005]

[1]    Mr Boskovic applies afresh for bail on the basis of changed circumstances namely the fact that he is suffering physical abuse from other prisoners and is medically unwell as a result of serious depression for which he is receiving treatment in prison.

[2]    Mr Boskovic was arrested in September 2003 on one charge of sexual violation by rape and three of sexual violation by unlawful sexual connection and  has been in custody ever since. During that time he has had other charges heard and disposed of in the District Court and has been substantially acquitted on them.

[3]    He now faces a trial on the current charges in June 2005. The charges are extremely serious and involve a girl who was 13 years old at the time of the alleged offending. I cannot form any view on the strength of the Crown  case.  Crown counsel asserts that the case is a very strong one and that the complainant has clear and specific recollection of the events. Mr Boskovic’s counsel points to aspects of the witness statements which would tend to support her client’s position.

[4]    It is obvious, however, that if convicted Mr Boskovic will very likely face a lengthy term of imprisonment. Mr Boskovic’s criminal history is a long one and involves numerous breaches of bail and offending whilst on bail.

[5]    In these circumstances I am very heavily influenced by the risk that he may re-offend whilst on bail. In view of the seriousness of the charges and the consequences if convicted there must also be a risk that he will fail to appear.

[6]    Finally I am able to take into account under s 8(3) the views of the complainant in this case. She is said to be vehemently opposed to bail. This is not the most significant factor but it is a factor.

[7]    In all the circumstances I am satisfied that the interests of the community cannot be served by releasing Mr Boskovic on bail and bail is therefore refused.

P Courtney J