Successfully Securing Bail in Serious Terrorism-Related Offences Matter
Case Overview
Lucy Massouras acted for a young client who had been charged with possession/control of violent extremist material accessed via a carriage service pursuant to s 464.45C(1) of the Criminal Code 1995.
The client had no prior experience in custody and benefited from a strong and supportive family network. Following his arrest, the prosecution made an application to remand him in custody pending the outcome of his criminal charges.
Due to the serious nature of the allegations, the prosecution vigorously opposed the client being released on bail.
The legal challenge was demonstrating to the Court that exceptional circumstances existed to warrant bail being granted and that any alleged risk could be ameliorated to an acceptable level.
Defence Strategy
We developed a comprehensive strategy focused on satisfying the relevant statutory requirements of the Bail Act 1977.
We prepared detailed and persuasive submissions highlighting several key factors in the client's favour, including his youth, strong family support network and the fact that this was his first experience in custody.
The defence also addressed the availability of strict bail conditions to address any concerns raised by the prosecution.
We carefully addressed each of the risks alleged by the prosecution. The defence strategy centred on demonstrating that the client was a suitable candidate for bail whilst ensuring the Court had confidence that community safety concerns could be properly addressed.
The defence carefully addressed the statutory considerations under the Bail Act 1977 and demonstrated that exceptional circumstances could be made out and that any identified risks could be adequately managed through appropriate conditions.
Result
The Court granted the client bail despite the serious nature of the allegations and the prosecution's opposition.
As a result, the client was released from custody and permitted to return to the community.
Given the seriousness of the charges and the contested nature of the application, the outcome represented an excellent result for the client.
Disclaimer: The case results featured are real matters handled by our firm. However, every case is different and outcomes vary depending on a range of factors, including the specific facts, circumstances and evidence involved. Past results are not a guarantee of future outcomes and should not be relied upon to predict or determine the result of your matter.