Supreme Court Justice Judith Kelly refuses to stand down from Peter Bravos trial

A SUPREME Court Justice has refused to disqualify herself from hearing the upcoming trial of former NT top cop and accused rapist Peter Bravos, despite having a connection to the trial’s ‘second most important witness’

Supreme Court Justice Judith Kelly will not disqualify herself from hearing the rape trial of former top cop Peter Bravos. Picture: Keri Megelus

A NORTHERN Territory Supreme Court Justice has refused to disqualify herself from hearing the upcoming trial of former top cop and accused rapist Peter Bravos, despite having a connection to the trial’s “second most important witness”.

Bravos’s defence lawyer John Lawrence SC applied last week for Justice Judith Kelly to recuse herself from the trial – which is set to start in April – saying her relationship with the witness could mean she unfairly favours her during cross-examination.

Two other NT Supreme Court Justices – Jenny Blokland and Dean Mildren – have already recused themselves from the trial as they also know the witness, who has worked extensively in the legal field in the Territory.

However during a hearing in the Darwin Supreme Court on Monday, Justice Kelly told the court the other justices had a closer personal relationship to the witness.

“These professional dealings (of Justice Kelly with the witness) have not been numerous or frequent,” she said.

She also said that Mr Lawrence’s argument that she could unfairly favour people throughout the trial because of her professional relationship with them could apply to any of the lawyers involved.

“This is a small jurisdiction,” she said.

“The same apprehension would presumably apply to every single member of this court.”

NT NEWS special half price subscription deal: Just $3.50 a week*

The court heard that, despite Justice Kelly’s ruling, efforts were being made to see if a judge from interstate could hear the trial instead.

“I think it would be actually desirable for this case to be heard from a judge from outside the jurisdiction … as a matter of convenience as distinct from apprehended bias,” Justice Kelly said.