IN THE SUPREME COURT


DPP (NSW)
- v -

Tara Elizabeth Follett
_____________________________________________________

SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT
_____________________________________________________


Introduction

1. A release Application is being made by the applicant.
2. 27 May 2020 - The accused was arrested.
3. 27 May 2019 - A release application for bail was made to Dubbo Local Court. Application was refused.
s 18 factors
1. This application attracts the provisions of the s 18 of the Bail Act. And the show cause provisions don’t apply
The indictment
The applicant has been charged with one sequence of Participate in criminal group contribute to criminal activity as per Section 93(T)(1) Crimes Act 1900.



The crown will have issues in relations to sequence 1

i. On page 2 of the police facts sheet they assert that the accused is responsible for the management of telecommunication of Thompson police provide no detailed explanation as to how they came to this basis.
ii. Police also assert that the accused was responsible for conducting surveillance for the criminal group and managing proceeds of crime again no basis or evidence has been given to support this assertion.

iii. Upon the search of the accused property the police state that instructions for the self destruction of Thompson phone and icloud, icloud accounts were located. Police again do not provide evidence as to why they are of the view that the instructions were firstly from Thompson/the criminal group or why they equated to self destruction/s.


Section 18 factors
2. The following section 18 factors are relevant;
i. The applicant has close community ties. She was born in Australia. She is an Australian citizen.
ii. The applicants Grand Mother, mother Karon Horan and her sister Rachelle Patricia Follett is a persons of excellent repute.
iii. The applicants sister and mother give an undertaking that they will assist the accused in complying with her bail conditions.
iv. The applicants sister and mother give an undertaking that they will report the applicant to the police if she fails to comply with any of her bail conditions.
v. The applicant will have no communication with any of the co accused
vi. The age of the applicant is a significant consideration. She was 35years of age at the time of the offence.
vii. The applicant also has no history of non-compliance with any bail conditions or failures to appear.
viii. The applicant cannot be described as someone who has committed serious offences whilst on bail.
ix. The applicant does not possess a passport and he would comply with any condition that he is not to apply for any travel documents.
x. The applicant is prepared to be the subject of a condition that confines her to what is often referred to as ‘house arrest’. The applicant would be residing with her Mother,
xi. The applicant is also able to reside with her Grand Mother if the court finds it suitable, and is prepared to be released subjected to a ‘house arrest’.
xii. The applicant and her family are willing to comply with an enforcement condition.
xiii. The applicant will be providing $5000 cash assurity.
3. In all the circumstances of the case, it is submitted that the relevant factors, when combined, show cause why detention is not justified, and bail should be granted on strict conditions.
Javid Faiz

Solicitor

Sydney Criminal Law Specialists
2/247 Church Street Parramatta NSW 2150

More Information: - https://www.sydneycriminallawspecialists.com.au/