Application for Bail in the Supreme Court of Victoria
Quick Facts
Our client was charged with:
- aiding and abetting dealing in the proceeds of crime to the value of $100,000 or more, contrary to sections 400.4 and 11.2 of the Commonwealth Criminal Code
- deriving a benefit from the earnings of sex work without holding the necessary licence, contrary to section 10 of the Sex Work Act 1994 (Vic)
Consequences of Pre-Trial Detention
In this case, our client was prima facie entitled to bail. If the court refused bail, she would remain in custody while awaiting trial. That period of pre-trial detention would likely have lasted at least 18 months.
What Our Client Received
Bail was granted with conditions.
Why Was This a Favourable Outcome?
This outcome meant our client did not remain in custody while waiting for her hearing to commence.
Case Background
Our client is an Australian citizen with ties to China and Korea.
The prosecution alleged that our client assisted her sister in dealing with money said to be the proceeds of crime. The prosecution claimed that the money came from sex work businesses operating without the required licences.
Police alleged that our client’s sister headed a syndicate that ran multiple sex work businesses unlawfully. They also alleged that our client helped her sister manage financial matters connected to those businesses.
The prosecution estimated that our client had assisted in dealing with between $500,000 and $800,000 in alleged proceeds of crime. It also claimed that our client had unexplained wealth and assets consistent with a high disposable income.
At the bail hearing, the prosecution argued that our client presented an unacceptable flight risk. It also argued that she posed an unacceptable risk of reoffending. However, the prosecution carried the onus of proving those risks.
The prosecution relied heavily on our client’s overseas ties, as well as the amount of money involved. It argued that those matters increased the risk that she would flee.
However, we submitted that the prosecution had not provided sufficient evidence to establish an unacceptable risk of reoffending. We also argued that strict bail conditions could adequately reduce any risk of flight. In the end, the court accepted that position and granted our client bail.
If you have any queries on bail applications, please contact us to get help.
Disclaimer: Please be aware that the above piece is NOT intended to be definitive legal advice. If you have enquiries relating to the above subject matter, please contact us for an obligation free, face to face consultation.
