Cannabis Offence: No Injustice to Community

[rocklovespeace]

SUPREME COURT OF NEW SOUTH WALES

 

FILE COPY OF JUDGMENT

 

THE SUPREME COURT

OF NEW SOUTH WALES TO REMAIN ON COURT FILE

 

COMMON LAW DIVISION

 

NORRISH AJ

 

THURSDAY 6 AUGUST 2008

 

2008/11581001 - Regina v Peter TILL

 

JUDGMENT

 

 

1 HIS HONOUR: In the matter of Peter Till, Mr Till is charged pursuant to

 

s 10 Drug, Misuse and Trafficking Act with possession of a prohibited

 

drug. The offence was committed on 10 January 2008. He was

 

apparently convicted of this matter in his absence and fined $500 at

 

Lismore Local Court on 17 March 2008. The conviction was annulled by

 

the same court on 15 April 2008 and the matter stood over to 16 July

 

2008. On this date the learned magistrate determined to deal with the

 

matter "other than according to law" pursuant to relevant provisions of the

 

Mental (Criminal Procedure) Act ("the Act"). This led to the somewhat

 

surprising result that he was remanded into custody and was to remain in

 

custody until 10 October 2008 pending the preparation of a psychiatric

 

report whilst in custody.

 

 

2 Given the fact that the earlier conviction had been set aside by the

 

applicant, and the earlier conviction had attracted a fine of $500, it is

 

somewhat amazing that the learned magistrate should have seen fit 'to

 

remand the applicant in custody for a period of almost 3 months pending

 

the determination of the matter pursuant to the relevant provisions of the

 

Act. I do not want to unduly criticise the magistrate. I am sure the learned

 

magistrate was concerned to have the applicant properly assessed for the

 

-1-

 

 

purposes of the Act. But, it seems to me, with respect, that there is no

 

valid reason, even allowing for his criminal history and the like, for the

 

applicant to have been remanded in custody solely for the purposes of the

 

preparation of the relevant psychiatric or psychological report, and to be

 

remanded in custody way in excess of a period of time of custody which is

 

appropriate for this particular offence.

 

 

3 I am of the view that he should be granted bail and there should be

 

conditions that the applicant should appear in Lismore Local Court at 10

 

a.m. on 10 October 2008 and that he should report to Dr James

 

Alexander, his consultant psychologist, who practices at Nimbin, within

 

seven days of his release on bail and obey all reasonable directions of Dr

 

Alexander.

 

 

4 If it transpires on 10 October 2008 that the magistrate does not have the

 

benefit of a report for the purposes of the Act, then his Honour can remand

 

the matter again and direct a report be prepared. But this time, without the

 

applicant being in custody, unless he is in custody for some other matter.

 

 

5 In respect of the applicant's appearance in court, it seems to me, with

 

respect, that on the basis of the background of this matter, and on my

 

personal contact with the applicant at Lismore District Court in July last

 

year, there is little chance of him not appearing. In any event, if he does

 

not appear I do not think, in this particular matter, that an injustice will have

 

been done to the community.

 

 

6 Thus, having regard to all the matters arising under the Bail Act, my. view

 

is that bail should be granted and will be granted subject to the following

 

conditions:

 

 

7 (FOR BAIL CONDITIONS SEE COURT FILE)

 

oOo

 

2

Till_SC_NSW_8_August_2008.PDF

Edited August 14, 2009 by rocklovespeace

[loylty gets u nothing]

congrats

take care

bil