Darryl Roy Bell facing serious assault charges over a horror attack on former partner in Mackay

A prisoner on remand over an alleged horror attack on his former partner has claimed no lawyer can represent him unless they are willing to delve into his claims of police corruption.

Darryl Roy Bell is charged with assault and assault while armed over a horror attack that allegedly involved him stomping on a woman's foot resulting in fractures to her ankle.

A prisoner on remand has claimed no lawyer can represent him unless they are willing to delve into claims of police corruption in relation to his case.

Darryl Roy Bell has fired numerous solicitors and was self represented as he appeared in Mackay Magistrates Court via video link.

He is facing a raft of serious charges including grievous bodily harm, assaults causing bodily harm while armed/in company, and using a carriage service to menace, harass or cause offence in relation to alleged horror attacks on his partner.

It is alleged he committed violence against the woman over two months between December 2023 and February 2024 at Andergrove and Mackay.

The grievous bodily harm charge must be committed to the district court, it cannot be finalised in the magistrates jurisdiction.

His matter was mentioned on Wednesday the purpose of which Magistrate Bronwyn Hartigan said was “just to figure out what you’re up to”.

The court heard he had been represented by Harvey Legal, who had signed instructions to progress the GBH and AOBH matters in the quickest way to the district court.

Ms Hartigan said Harvey Legal then received further instructions from Mr Bell that “you didn’t want to do that anymore and further you did not want Harvey Legal to act for you anymore and that you want a committal with cross examination”.

Ms Hartigan explained this was a longer process to commit the matter to the higher court and asked Mr Bell if it was true he was unrepresented and did not want Harvey Legal acting on his behalf.

“Yes well I can’t have these people representing me if their not talking, they’re sending me bits of paper that have got outrageous comments on them about … the lawyers are not going into court saying … police corruption,” Mr Bell said via videolink.

Ms Hartigan had to cut the 56 year old off telling him “it would be extremely unlikely for any solicitor to entertain some kind of allegation of corruption”.

Under questioning by Ms Hartigan, Mr Bell affirmed he did want to cross examine the witnesses in relation to his matter.

“I want to cross examine them all,” he said.
Ms Hartigan explained since he was self represented it would be “your job to get on top of the law and it will be your job to do it properly” in relation to the steps involved in making an application to cross examine witnesses at committal.

“I do not recommend that you go down this path to be legally represented, you’re not dumb … but this is a serious job that needs to be done,” Ms Hartigan said before reading out the steps.

“You must do this. The fact you’re self represented is irrelevant … you have chosen to be self represented, these are the rules of what you have to do.”

Matters were adjourned to November.