Grace Hughes snatched in ‘violent’ struggle with father, who made ‘brave’ call to let her go: Court

Prosecutors say five-year-old Grace Hughes’ mother’s ‘florid belief about her child being abused’ was likely ‘the product of suggestion’ by the alleged abductor herself.

Prosecutors say Laura Hinks was involved in a ‘violent confrontation’ that ‘amounted to a struggle for the child’ when she allegedly abducted her daughter. Picture: Glenn Campbell

Kidnapped Darwin five-year-old Grace Hughes was snatched away from her father in a “violent” struggle before he made the “brave” decision to let her go, a court has heard.

Grace’s mother, Laura Adele Hinks, 35, again faced the Darwin Local Court on Tuesday, where she stands charged with the little girl’s abduction from a supervised parental visit in Berrimah on August 7.

Hinks asked Judge Ben O’Loughlin, through her lawyer, for an indication of her likely punishment if she pleaded guilty, with defence counsel Glenn Mohammed telling the court she had been following the instructions of her “mentor” and co-accused, Juliet Marie Oldroyd.

“This was not something that she had planned or orchestrated,” he said.

“She was following advice of someone she trusted and eventually saw as a mentor, who was assisting her with some difficult information that had come to light.
“That information being allegations of certain kinds made by her child to her, and in her view, the lack of any action or proper investigation that were being taken.”

Mr Mohammad said Hinks’s intention “wasn’t to deny anybody else access to the child, per se, the intention of it was to protect the child”.

He said she was “in two minds about how to deal with the situation”, “until the last minute”, when she decided “to go along with what her colleague and mentor was essentially guiding her to do”.

“Subsequent to the child being taken, again, there was no planning as to what would occur and ultimately there was no plan, it was just to get the child in a safe environment,” she said.

“That was all that my client had thought of and eventually, spectacularly, it obviously failed, and essentially she’s here before your honour.”

In arguing for Hinks to spend actual time behind bars if she pleaded guilty, prosecutor Ian Read SC told the court much of Hinks’ account was not accepted by the prosecution and there was nothing to suggest “reduced moral culpability” on her part.

“If there was some florid belief about her child being abused, then that would be a matter that would need to be before you with some expert evidence,” he said.

“The issue as to the abuse of the child, that had been hanging about for some time, and from the prosecution’s point of view, it is likely that that was the product of suggestion by the accused herself.”

Mr Read said there was nothing before the court to suggest that Hinks was “not aware of an orchestrated effort to abduct the child”.

“The facts plainly reveal it wasn’t in any way safe, it was a violent confrontation with the workers conducting the supervision, the father, and involved what amounted to a struggle for the child,” he said.

“One can only say that the father took a very brave and appropriate decision to just let the child go and (hope that) the police would get the child back.

“There was a police search and investigation and she didn’t hand herself in until the 19th of August, and during that time, she was a party to the continued abduction.”

Mr O’Loughlin said “given the nature of this matter” he was unable to provide a sentencing indication “on the spot” and adjourned the hearing until Friday.

“But I won’t be making any fact finding on the truth of the beliefs of the defendant,” he said.