Charges

The charges arose from a fire at a place of worship, with the prosecution alleging damage exceeding $20 million.

Charge 1: Criminal damage by fire
Charge 2: Reckless conduct endangering life

The Problem

The allegations were serious, the alleged damage was substantial, and the matter had attracted public attention.

The prosecution opposed bail and argued that the client presented an unacceptable risk to the community.

The central issue was whether strict, practical and enforceable bail conditions could reduce the alleged risk to an acceptable level.

Our Approach

The defence prepared a detailed bail application addressing the strength of the prosecution case, the proposed bail address, supervision, exclusion zones, curfew conditions and surety arrangements. King’s Counsel was briefed.

Submissions focused on the practical effect of the proposed conditions and whether they could adequately address the concerns raised by the prosecution.

The proposed conditions included a 9pm–6am curfew, exclusion zones and a supported family surety.

Outcome

Bail was granted on 22 strict conditions, including a 9pm–6am curfew, exclusion zones and a family surety.

Why This Case Matters

Serious allegations do not automatically prevent bail from being granted. In contested applications, the outcome may turn on whether the proposed conditions directly answer the risks alleged by the prosecution.

This matter demonstrates the importance of early preparation, detailed evidence review, properly supported surety arrangements and a bail plan tailored to the specific concerns raised in Court.