Do they go too far or are they too onerous?
Yesterday the New South Wales parliament passed new bail reforms that were made after community and media led outrage following the murder of Forbes woman Molly Ticehurst in April.
In Ms Ticehurst's case, her partner was given bail by a registrar despite being charged with multiple counts of sexual assault, stalking and malicious damage.
The first notable amendment introduced by the government is that registrars have been stripped of their power to make bail decisions and all decisions at first instance must be made by Magistrates.
The other big change that practitioners and clients alike should take heed of is that 'serious domestic violence offences' and the new coercive control offence have been made 'show cause offences'.
This means the presumption of bail is changed and a defendant must show cause as to why their detention is not justified.
A 'serious domestic violence offence' is defined as meaning offences where the maximun term of imprisonment is 14 years or more and the offence was committed against an intimate partner.
This means that offences such as sexual assault, kidnapping and choking to render someone unconcious with intent to commit another indictable offence would be all captured by the amendment.
If such a person shows cause, pursuant to s28B they must be subjected to a bail condition that they be subjected to electronic monitoring, unless the court is satisied that sufficient reasons exist in the itnerests of justice.
It would be difficult to see circumstances where the court would find that there are sufficient reasons to depart from the requirement to wear an ankle bracelet.
These changes are more than subtle ones to the Bail Act however, I dare say that there will be some that feel that they haven't gone far enough.
John Vizzone is a criminal barrister who appears regularly at bail hearings. If you any queries please contact 0416167690 of email:johnvizzone@marburychambers.com.au
Commenti