Author: Jones + Associates

by Jones + Associates

What You Need to Know About Bail Applications in Queensland

You Need to Know About Bail Applications in Queensland

In the context of criminal law matters, the term bail is synonymous, but it is often played with confusion. In this podcast, Jones + Associates Director, Alex Jones, talks about all things bail.

by Jones + Associates

Alcohol Ignition Interlocks

A “penalty” which is imposed on persons convicted of certain offences but not often discussed is the Alcohol Ignition Interlock Program.

A person is subject to the Alcohol Ignition Interlock Program when they are convicted of “high-risk drink driving offences”, which includes:

• Drive, or attempt to put in motion or be in charge of a vehicle under the influence of alcohol;
• Drive, or attempt to put in motion or be in charge of a vehicle with a blood/breath alcohol concentration of:
  • 10 or more
• Failing to provide a blood/breath specimen for analysis;
• Dangerous driving while affected by alcohol; or
• 2 or more drinking driving offences within the last 5 years.

Since 9 September 2021, persons who commit a “high-risk drink driving offence” will be subject to the performance-based interlock program.

Entry into performance-based interlock program

You are eligible to participate from the day after your driving disqualification ends or the day you are granted a restricted licence (work licence).

If you choose not to participate in the program, you will not be able to drive for 5 years from the end of your disqualification (or the date you were granted a work licence).

Participation in the program

There are 2 parts of the program:

• The learning period, for the first 8 months; and
• The performance period, for the final 4 months.

Throughout the whole period, you must comply with all rules, including:

• Hold a current licence with an interlock condition;
• Only drive a nominated vehicle with an interlock installed;
• Have a ‘no alcohol’ limit when driving;
• Attend all interlock service appointments; and
• Not attempt to tamper with or bypass the interlock.

If you don’t comply with the rules, the time in the program will be extended and you will be required to comply with the interlock program for longer.

There are several other requirements regarding complying with rules surrounding servicing your interlock device and verifying data.

Application to remove interlock

You can apply for an exemption to your interlock requirement to the Department of Transport and Main Roads if you meet a number of criteria. Those criteria include:

• If you live in a remote location;
• If you live on an island;
• If you have a medical condition which stops you from providing enough breath to operate an interlock; or
• You or your family member will experience severe hardship if you are not granted an exemption.

Jones + Associates can assist you with the preparation of this application if you are a person who meets one of the relevant criteria.

by Jones + Associates

Historical Child Sex Abuse Charges

Historical Child Sex Abuse Charges in Queensland

Historical sexual matters became more prominent before the Courts as a result of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse in 2013.

The fallout from the inquiry was that persons felt more comfortable making complaints of historical sexual abuse, and those complaints were taken seriously by prosecuting authorities. Also, new legislation was introduced which required an adult who reasonably believed (or should reasonably believe) that a child is being or has been the victim of sexual abuse by another adult to report that to police.

The most prominent case from this inquiry was the matter of Cardinal George Pell.

Jones + Associates have represented a number of persons charged with these historical sexual abuse offences, and a common concern our clients share, particularly when first charged is “how do I prove these allegations false”.

An important part of our legal process is that the burden of proof is on the prosecution, and that burden requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

Whilst in a perfect world for our clients, an alibi for every allegation would be useful, considering the nature of these allegations, with non-specific timing, an alibi is often impossible to rely upon.

These types of charges can still be successfully defended without an alibi. There are several approaches which can be taken to trials to achieve a positive result, and our office has utilised a number of these to successfully defend clients against these types of allegations.

As was the case in the matter of George Pell, he was able to successfully defend those charges without necessarily relying upon an alibi to do so.

It is important for persons charged with these offences to understand that the burden is not on them to prove these types of allegations wrong, but upon the Crown to prove the allegations true beyond a reasonable doubt. If you are charged with an offence of this nature and need legal advice, don’t delay – contact Jones + Associates.

by Jones + Associates

Is Your Phone Tapped? What You Must Know About Police Expanding Powers

In the last 10-20 years Police have unleashed an extremely effective yet seemingly invisible investigative tool in their “war on crime”. The device in question fits easily in your pocket and most of the population already possess one, if not more.

Mobile phones are being utilised with devastating effect by Police against unsuspecting targets simply by intercepting conversations and text messages. That went a step further in recent times with the FBI creating an encrypted trojan horse called ‘ANOM’ which allowed them to own and operate the network that alleged criminals were utilising.

Despite popular belief, the listening “devices” which enable Police to silently spy on people’s lives don’t even require to be planted in your phone. The technology used enables the Police to simply access the phone network and begin listening.

This investigative method erodes a person’s right to silence, records admissions without the proper and usual warnings from Police, and finally, is a substantial invasion of privacy.

Everything said or sent in a message is evidence, there need not be any other corroborating evidence except the “admissions” captured within conversation.

These so-called “admissions” are quite often made in conversations with friends, and are used in evidence despite whether the statements are actually true. The Police then make arrests because an “admission” to a crime or crimes is made, with the evidence being nothing more than a phone conversation between friends or relatives.

The ever increasing use of this tactic by Police has ensured countless people have been charged and convicted of crimes they may never have committed, simply because they made “admissions” on the phone.

Whilst most law-abiding members of the public won’t be particularly concerned by the use of this technology, it is important to note that Police listen to or see both sides of every phone call and every text message and photo. One doesn’t need to be the subject or “target” of the telephone intercept to be caught up in the investigation.

A simple joke or “banter” over the phone with the wrong person could now spell disaster for any member of the public, and it is only when this happens that this issue will be brought to the attention of the public – and by then it will be too late and have their privacy invaded.

Disturbingly, figures suggest that Australians are now nearly 20 times more likely to have their phones “tapped” than citizens in the Unites States.

Furthermore, new proposals would allow the widening of powers to use this method to investigate less serious crimes, leading to even more use of this methodology.

Should you have any questions or are concerned that you or those close to you might be subject to telephone intercepts, do not hesitate to contact the Brisbane Criminal Lawyers at Jones + Associates on our 24h number (07) 3229 3166.

by Jones + Associates

Appeals Process

The New South Wales Attorney General Michael Daley on Monday announced Kathleen Folbigg had been pardoned and would be released immediately.

The effect of this pardon is that Ms Folbigg has been relieved of the penalty imposed on her because of her criminal conviction.

This is different to an appeal against conviction, which hopes to quash a conviction recorded against a person.

When would I appeal and how do I appeal a criminal conviction?

An appeal can be brought if a person is convicted of a crime in either the Magistrates, District or Supreme Court.

If you are convicted of an offence before the Magistrates Court, you have a right of appeal to the District Court of Queensland. If you are convicted of an offence before the District or Supreme Courts, you have a right of appeal to the Court of Appeal. There is then an ability to appeal further to the High Court of Australia.

There are time limits for which an appeal can be lodged, so you should seek legal advice from Jones + Associates as soon as possible if you are convicted and feel that conviction was unfair or unsafe. Jones + Associates will provide you with advice on the prospects of your appeal and prepare all the necessary paperwork on your behalf.

by Jones + Associates

What to do if you need to go to Court?

by Jones + Associates

Article by “The Conversation” – Scottish Government Trialling Judge-Only Rape Trials

On the 11^th day of May 2023, “The Conversation” published an article about the Scottish Government’s proposal to conduct a pilot to test out running rape trials without a jury, and the decision-making power being left with the judge. This is called a “judge-only” trial in Queensland, and these will occur when on application the Court determines it is “in the interests of justice” for there to be such.

The article states that “only 51% of trials lead to conviction, which is simply not acceptable in a modern justice system. Reform is clearly needed to increase convictions.”

This statement completely opposes one of the fundamental principles of law, that a person is presumed innocent, and the burden of proof is on prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt a person’s guilt.

The justice system, and more specifically the trial system, is not, and cannot, be designed with a fundamental purpose of finding a person guilty.

A trial is essentially a truth finding mission where half of the parties say something occurred, and the other half say it didn’t. A trial allows both parties to present and dispute evidence in an attempt to convince the decision maker, whether it be a judge or a jury, of their “view”.

What the statistic and subsequently the article fails to recognise is that a criminal matter doesn’t necessarily always proceed to trial, and in fact a great majority proceeds directly to sentence with the offender entering a plea of guilty.

When a matter is listed for trial, it means that despite a complaint being made by a person, the accused has entered a plea of not guilty and they are afforded the chance to fight the allegations. This must be a fair process, and not one which focusses or aims at finding them guilty.

A jury is a fundamental part of this process. Often calling upon their real-world experience, they are independent persons who make decisions based solely off the evidence they are presented with, and their individual judgement of that evidence.

In more sensitive matters, it is often argued that a judge is best tasked with the role of the decision maker as they are less likely to be biased or impacted by the nature of the offence or allegations and can focus on the actual state of the evidence.

Creating a system with a view of securing more guilty verdicts, rather than focussing on achieving just and fair outcomes for all persons, is not within the interests of justice or the public.

Read the Article published by The Conversation 🡲

by Jones + Associates

Role of a Criminal Defence Lawyer

by Jones + Associates

Youth Justice. Punishment Beyond Rehabilitation.

There has been significant attention given recently to the Court of Appeal dismissing appeals against the sentence of a young man who (at 17 years of age), whilst driving dangerously and under the influence of alcohol and drugs, killed a young couple and their unborn child.

A tragic event such as this has a catastrophic and lifelong impacts to everyone associated with the matter, whether that be the victims, their friends and families but also the perpetrator.

As the sentencing judge indicated, no sentence will ever be adequate and cannot do justice to the suffering caused. Unfortunately, nothing can ever undo the events of that day.

With that in mind, the court was faced with sentencing a young person who was only 17 at the time of the offending. The court heard of the extremely unfortunate and tragic events of his own upbringing, one that included neglect, exposure to domestic violence and abuse and an early exposure to illicit substances.

It is in the context of a terrible upbringing with a clear lack of positive guidance, together with the immaturity and recklessness that comes with being a 17 year old, that these tragic events have unfolded.

A judge must balance these factors when assessing a proper penalty that not only punishes this (or any) young person for these terrible acts, but also offers an opportunity to rehabilitate and become a contributing member of society.

We, thankfully, are not a society that simply locks the cell and throws away the key – giving up on any person who falls foul of the law. There are countless redemption stories of people who have been punished for terrible behaviours, to flourish after having served their punishments.

As a society, we should not forget that people make mistakes and not all mistakes are equal. Studies show that young males are particularly poor decision makers and most people in society, if being true to themselves, would admit making poor decisions, particularly in their youth – hopefully, they were lucky enough to not result in a tragic outcome such as in this instance.

The sentence imposed in this case was 10 years imprisonment. There is widespread reporting that he was sentenced to 6 years – this is incorrect. The sentencing judge allowed the young man to apply to the parole board to be released after serving 6 years, but that is no guarantee to occur and is a decision for the parole board.

The judge was not permitted to impose a sentence any longer than 10 years unless the court found the offence to be particularly heinous in all the circumstances. A classic example of this would be a premeditated murder.

The offender did not enter a plea of guilty to murder, and by accepting his plea to manslaughter, the prosecution accepted he did not intend to kill or maim the victims. That is not an issue for the Youth Justice Act or the courts to deal with – that was accepted by prosecutions.

It is common for the public to look at a matter such as this and think sentencing laws ought to be tougher. However, without a proper understanding of the factual matters of the offending, the personal matters of the offender as well as sentencing principles, it is unfair to criticise the system.

We have all been young and most of us have family and friends who have or will go through our teenage years when decision-making is often questionable. If your loved one caused a terrible tragedy such as this, I am sure opinions would be very different.

It would not be in society’s best interests to incarcerate young people for decades. What do we expect will happen when they are eventually released, with no prospects/education or qualifications?

One mistake, even those that lead to horrible and tragic outcomes, should not cause a person to be punished beyond rehabilitation or hope.

At the conclusion of the appeal hearing, the court decided to dismiss both the prosecution appeal as well as the young person’s appeal in relation to the sentence.

by Jones + Associates

Cairns Fraud Successfully Defended

Jones + Associates recently acted for a man in the Cairns District Court accused of assisting a local businessman, Mr Graham King to defraud his business Air First Pty Ltd.

Mr King had previously plead guilty to a number of fraud related offences as a result of him dishonestly obtaining hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Our client was charged with three (3) offences and maintained to the jury that he was unaware of Mr Kings fraudulent scheme and would not knowingly assist him to dishonestly benefit, in any way.

The jury heard direct evidence from our client as well as hearing character evidence from a number of upstanding members of the community attesting to our client’s good character. After six days of trial, the jury returned verdicts of not guilty in relation to two of the offences.

The jury could not come to a decision in relation to the third offence.

This was a successful outcome for our client who was defending complicated and technical fraud allegations.

This continues Jones + Associates proud tradition of being leaders in defending white collar criminal matters.

Should you have any queries in relation to white collar matters you should contact Jones + Associates as a matter of priority.