Breach is man’s 16th

De­fen­dant says part­ner’s bruises are ‘hick­ies’

The Observer - - NEWS - Sarah Ste­ger Sarah.Ste­ger@glad­sto­neob­

A MAN who says the bruises on his part­ner’s neck are hick­ies has been de­nied bail.

The 39-year-old was re­manded in cus­tody this week af­ter be­ing held at the watch house af­ter breach­ing a do­mes­tic vi­o­lence or­der last week.

Strongly op­pos­ing bail, po­lice prose­cu­tor Se­nior Con­sta­ble Balan Sel­vadu­rai said the de­fen­dant would pose an un­ac­cept­able risk to the ag­grieved if re­leased.

Sen-Con­sta­ble Sel­vadu­rai said about 5.30pm on Fe­bru­ary 9, the ag­grieved called po­lice and told them she needed of­fi­cers to “come and get” her.

Glad­stone Mag­is­trates Court was told the cou­ple had been ar­gu­ing when the de­fen­dant “pinned (the woman) to the wall and held her by the throat”, leav­ing two bruises on her neck.

Sen-Con­sta­ble Sel­vadu­rai said when po­lice ar­rived, the man an­swered the door but had an “ag­gres­sive and en­raged de­meanour”.

He said the man threat­ened to “kick (the ag­grieved’s) f----ing neck in” if she an­swered the door her­self.

De­fence lawyer Jun Pepito pushed for his client to be re­leased on bail, say­ing the man had not had an en­try in his his­tory made since 2015.

Mr Pepito also said his client said the dark marks on the vic­tim’s neck were not bruises, but hick­ies.

Sen-Con­sta­ble Sel­vadu­rai said the ver­bal threat was an im­por­tant fac­tor for Mag­is­trate Me­lanie Ho to con­sider in her de­ci­sion.

“It shows that the de­fen­dant can stand over the ag­grieved,” he said.

The court was told of a pre­vi­ous in­ci­dent in­volv­ing the same ag­grieved which demon­strated there was a pat­tern of be­hav­iour.

Sen-Con­sta­ble Sel­vadu­rai said on De­cem­ber 24, 2017, the ag­grieved had told po­lice she had been play­ing with a dog when it jumped up, head-butting her in the eye and in­jur­ing her face.

At a later time, the ag­grieved told po­lice her fa­cial in­juries had ac­tu­ally been caused by the de­fen­dant.

“This shows he can stand over her (the ag­grieved),” Sen-Con­sta­ble Sel­vadu­rai told Ms Ho.

The court heard the lat­est of­fence was the 39-year-old’s 16th breach of a DVO.

In the past, the de­fen­dant served at least four months in prison for a sim­i­lar of­fence and has 16 pages of crim­i­nal his­tory.

He has also failed to ap­pear in court four times.

Ms Ho re­fused the man’s bail on ac­count that he was “an un­ac­cept­able risk” for not show­ing up to court and to the vic­tim’s safety.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Australia

© PressReader. All rights reserved.