Vaey Montanna-Freya Varmora on attempted murder charge over alleged road rage attack
A mum of two allegedly used her car as a weapon and tried to run a man down following a road rage incident, a court has heard, as a magistrate questioned why she had been charged with attempted murder.
Police & Courts
Don't miss out on the headlines from Police & Courts. Followed categories will be added to My News.
Explosive details have been released after a mum of two allegedly used her car as a weapon and tried to run a man down following a road rage incident.
Footage of the alleged clash was played in Mackay Magistrates Court during a bail application for Vaey Montanna-Freya Varmora, as police pushed to keep her behind bars on remand.
The footage captured by a Goldsmith St resident allegedly showed Ms Varmora drive her car at him, striking him with the front of the vehicle and forcing him onto the bonnet.
“She’s a danger to the community, she is a danger to anyone that upsets her, she is a danger to herself,” Prosecutor Matt Saunders argued.
Reading from the police objection document, Mr Saunders said it was alleged Ms Varmora had intended to hit the victim because she believed he was going to bash her and thought that by doing so the victim would get in his car and leave her alone.
The court heard during a police interview Ms Varmora allegedly answered a phone call during which he said “he started trying to fight me so I got back in my car and I run him down with my car. I run him over three times … I’m going to kill the c--- and I tried to squish him under the wheel”.
Ms Varmora is charged with attempted murder and threatening violence over an alleged incident about 5.15pm on January 5, 2025 on Goldsmith St.
Her lawyer Rob Beamish said the allegations would be contested.
Police allege Ms Varmora had cut off another driver at a roundabout and that other driver had become angry and tailgated the 27-year-old mum of two, who slammed on her brakes causing the two vehicles to collide, the court heard.
This allegedly resulted in a verbal clash between Ms Varmora and the man and a woman, the driver of another vehicle and its passenger.
In the footage, Ms Varmora returns to her car, before driving into the second vehicle, reversing and then driving at the man as he runs away.
She then turned her car around driving at the man a second time, hitting him and causing him to roll on and over her car’s bonnet, while she lost control and hit a tree.
She then drove at the man a third time.
It is alleged she threatened to use a shard of glass to cause harm to the passenger.
The court heard police had seized the vehicle, which had been forensically examined and was in the process of an investigative search.
Mr Saunders told the court Ms Varmora had previously faced court in 2020 for a dangerous driving incident with “chillingly similar” facts, after she rammed her vehicle into a shed in anger over an argument with a former partner.
The court heard there had been a dispute about ownership of a vehicle and Ms Varmora had been driving around trying to locate the car and believed her former partner had been hiding it.
She drove to his address where she twice rammed the vehicle she was in into a shed at the property. She was fined $1400, ordered to pay $3500 restitution and disqualified from driving for six months.
Magistrate Damien Dwyer initially described the incident as “just a road rage thing that’s gone too far”, revealing Ms Varmora was allegedly driving about 10kmh during the incident.
“That doesn’t seem as serious as trying to run someone over at 100kmh,” Mr Dwyer said.
However once the video had been played he said “I think it’s a bit stronger now”, but also querying if attempted murder “is an appropriate charge”.
Mr Saunders argued it was a “very serious matter”, that Ms Varmora had allegedly been enraged and that it “was calculated”.
“It could have been a whole lot worse if she’d actually run him over … he was thrown in the air,” Mr Saunders said.
Mr Dwyer agreed it was a serious incident but maintained queries on whether or not attempted murder was the right charge.
Rob Beamish, of McKay’s Solicitors, said the allegations as they were would be contested and it would take a long time to get to trial.
He argued the only real risk regarding his client was of endangering the safety and welfare of a person, which could be mitigated with conditions including residential, reporting and no contact orders.
“There is another charge that could have more appropriately been laid in my submission,” Mr Beamish said.
Mr Dwyer said the only concern seemed to be Ms Varmora “committed further offences while driving a vehicle”, adding that could be ameliorated with conditions.
He allowed Ms Varmora bail on the condition she was not allowed to drive a motor vehicle of any description until the case is finalised. She must also abide by residential, reporting and no contact orders.