An eleventh-hour submission of police and witness statements by the crown prosecutor during a bail application for an international student in Holtze prison on serious charges, has tipped the balance in favour of bail refusal in Darwin local court this morning.
Judge Julie Franz presided over the matter earlier in the week before it was adjourned to this morning, where a bail assessment report by corrections came back on the student defendant, assessing him as "suitable".
The judge addressed the court: "I'm considering giving bail, as I said I would earlier this week, but I'm also considering the condition that the passport be surrendered."
In her breakdown of the bail conditions, she said: "Do not approach Darwin airport or any port of exit from Australia, but also that he not have any contact, whether directly or indirectly, with [the complainant]."
The crown prosecutor said they were opposed to bail.
In her submissions to the court, the prosecutor said: "The allegations are incredibly serious. Has your honour had a chance to read the charges?
Judge: "I have read the charges and I've read the statement of facts, and I agree that the allegations are serious."
The prosecution said while they "heard" what was said about the passport, "the primary concern from the prosecution's perspective is the safety of the complainant [inaudible]."
A number of witness statements and further evidence that had not been disclosed in relation to the charges, were tendered during the hearing.
The evidence included the primary alleged victim's diary entry, where the defendant was alleged to have written that her "life was over" on the date his visa expired, which The Mango Inquirer will not disclose, as required by NT law to prevent identifying aspects of the defendant being published.
Both the judge and barrister took a moment to read through, before an offer to stand the matter down so the barrister could take more time to review the material.
The defence barrister said he didn't need any further time to review, and that: "I made submissions about that evidence the other day."
The prosecution said: "Essentially your honour, the crown case, is that they've been in a relationship. They lived together. She moved out and they broke up.
"She told him that the relationship was over. And then it's alleged that he stalked her, and attended her workplace after the breakup.
"She blocked him on social media. He showed up at her work and said if she didn't unblock him he would shout at her at work.
"The second incident of actual violence has occurred when he's allegedly unlawfully entered her house.
"He's come into her bedroom, assaulted her with weapons including a chair, and a candle holder; striking her multiple times and assaulting her housemate who also lives at the house.
"Also particularly, in this matter, is the language used during that second incident, where he's saying, allegedly: "I wanna fuck you. I don't care you [inaudible]. You want me to go to jail. I'm going to fuck you. I'm going to fight you. I'm going to put [inaudible] on this bed as well.
"There's concern that there would be interference with the witnesses, the two other housemates.
"There's a risk of further offending against this same complainant.
"It's the prosecution's submission [inaudible] poses an unacceptable risk to her safety.
"Noting that one of the charged offences is a serious sexual offence, your honour has to consider the safety of the complainant.
The prosecution said their primary submission was that: "none of the conditions that your honour can put in place, would sufficiently protect the complainant.
Defence barrister: "The most serious charge is a historical report of many months ago which is totally uncorroborated.
"Whilst there might be some corroboration around the more recent serious matters, in no way shape or form can it be described as a strong crown case.
"The fundamentals haven't changed from my previous submissions, that is, a man with no prior history, has never failed to give an undertaking to this court, or any, by way of [inaudible].
"He's not a citizen, but he can't be described as a flight risk. He's working here. He's engaged in education on a fulltime basis. I respectfully submit that the submissions that my friend has put, that are relevant for the purposes of a section 24, are not sufficient that you should be dissuaded by the disposition that you [inaudible].
"We say, that with those conditions, and monitoring any concerns you may have about inference with witnesses or approach to the victim are totally [inaudible] is on notice; if there's any such conduct, he understands where he's going to be, and that's where he is right now.
"On the basis of his personal antecedence and the material that's been disclosed evidentiary, from the prosecution [inaudible] bail should be granted."
Judge Franz delivered her decision: "Today I'm deciding bail on [name]. A first offender. He's a young man. He does [inaudible] offences. Aggravated assaults, sexual intercourse without consent, stalking, entering into a building, trespass, with the intent of assaulting her.
The rape is alleged to have occurred on 25th March 2024, with the other charges more recently in August.
Judge Franz: "I have considered the submissions of the defence. I have a bail assessment report for [name]. It is a difficult matter to decide on. One that I was going to say was somewhat line balled.
"But when I do weigh up all the matters that I have had regard to, materials tendered by the prosecution today. Given his return to [name] residence, allegedly he's gone into her home, threatened her, allegedly he's assaulted her, done it while a witness was present, trying to intervene.
"I do have concerns for the safety of the complainant. I have [inaudible] so on balance being mindful [inaudible] I will refuse bail."
The defendant was remanded in custody and doesn't need to appear via video link for his next hearing on September 25th.
Alleged sexual offenders who have not been committed to stand trial in the NT cannot have their names nor identifying aspects published.
By withholding the defendant's nationality and employer, I believe there's enough international students in Darwin for me to meet the requirements of suppression laws; although there's always a degree of risk.
We'll cross that bridge when we come to it.
We are The Mango Inquirer.
