- Unreported Judgment
SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
Application No 226 of 2004
IN THE MATTER OF A BAIL APPLICATION BY STEPHEN McGILL
HIS HONOUR: In this matter, the applicant seeks bail in respect of two charges against him by which it is alleged that firstly, on the 6th May 2004, he contravened a domestic violence order pronounced on the 27th of January 2004 at the Magistrates Court at Mareeba. Secondly, that on the 6th of May 2004, he unlawfully assaulted Carolyn Kasandra Moss.
Ms Moss was at the time, living in a de facto relationship with the applicant. This relationship has now continued some time. Ms Moss was the subject of the domestic violence order referred to above, which order was served on the applicant on the 2nd of March 2004.
The alleged circumstances leading to the charge of the assault upon her are set out in the QP9, Exhibit FJS3 to the affidavit of Ms Schwilk filed by leave this day. It is to the effect that at about 10.15 p.m. on that day, Ms Moss was lying on her bed in the bedroom watching television with her daughter. The applicant entered the room, started yelling at her saying “I'll kill you. You're a slut.” He then slapped her across the left-hand side of the head with an open hand as she lay on the bed, presumably with her daughter still present. That assault was interrupted by the applicant's father who asked the applicant to desist. He and Ms Moss went outside and the argument continued although there was no further assault. The police were called and the charges were laid.
It is suggested by Mr Mellick on behalf of the applicant that type of offending is at the lower end of the scale. It perhaps could have been dealt with in a summary way. But when one looks further at the conduct of the applicant, going back only to January 2004 to the events which led to the domestic violence order being made, one notes that there was an assault on that occasion which had these features: the applicant started to abuse Ms Moss. He told her to “Fuck off. You're a fucking dog cunt.” He then grabbed Ms Moss by the throat with his right hand and started to choke her. He pushed her out the back door of the dwelling, up against the patio railing banging her head twice against the railing. This caused her obvious injuries.
Well now, the applicant was at the time of both these events in May was on bail in respect of one charge of indecent assault and two charges of rape, all of which were alleged to have occurred on the 7th of January 2003. These charges were brought to trial in November 2003, but the trial miscarried and he was allowed bail pending the retrial set for June 2004.
The basis upon which it is argued that he should be allowed bail are firstly, his mature age - 38 years; the time that he has already spent in custody and the fact that this will interfere with the preparation of his retrial; and thirdly, that in the past, he has answered bail.
The applicant may have answered bail in the past, but his time before the Courts and the terms of imprisonment in the past have not caused him to moderate his behaviour. It is the risk of reoffending that causes the Director of Public Prosecutions to oppose this application. The applicant's criminal record shows the following features: his criminal offending commenced when he was 19 years of age. In the intervening 19 years to the present, he has had 21 appearances in Court, not including the three charges awaiting trial and the subject charge. He has six appearances in relation to traffic offences, mainly relating to driving whilst under the influence of liquor and driving whilst disqualified.
His criminal offences range from breaking and entering, producing and possession dangerous drugs, aggravated assault on a female, assault occasioning bodily harm, three breaches of domestic violence orders and one breach of probation. It goes without saying this applicant is at a very serious risk of reoffending and it seems terms of imprisonment, probation orders or domestic violence orders do not stop him.
He is in a show cause situation which requires him to satisfy me that he does not present a serious risk of reoffending. His record, his circumstances of the two assaults which have occurred while having been granted bail after the District Court miscarriage of trial, lead me to the only conclusion, that is, that he has failed to so convince me. The application is dismissed.
- Published Case Name:
In the Matter of a Bail Application by Stephen McGill
- Shortened Case Name:
 QSC 184
17 May 2004
No Litigation History