James Charles Brown, 30, refused bail after allegedly being involved in a police car chase

A 30 year old man, who has “spent a significant portion of his adult life in custody”, was granted bail and was allegedly back reoffending 10 days later.

A man with a “terrible” criminal history has been refused bail after he was allegedly involved in a police pursuit at Sarina earlier this week.

James Charles Brown, 30 appeared in custody in Mackay Magistrates Court on Tuesday, December 28, where he made a bail application.

Mr Brown is charged with unlawful use of a motor vehicle, dangerous operation of a motor vehicle, evading police, disqualified driving, and obstructing a police officer - all in relation to incidents alleged to have occurred at Sarina on December 27.

He is further charged with a breach of bail on December 17.

Mr Brown was not required to enter a plea on those charges.

Before the bail application was heard on Tuesday, Mr Brown’s solicitor told Acting Magistrate Ron Muirhead that Mr Brown had other matters in court at Mackay on January 7.

“He’s in a show cause situation today,” the solicitor said.

Mr Muirhead read a police objection to bail before hearing further from Mr Brown’s solicitor.

“Mr Brown is a 30-year-old Aboriginal man who has spent a significant portion of his adult life in custody,” the solicitor said.

“He finished serving a sentence in November and he was granted bail (by a magistrate) to have an outstanding matter dealt with through the Murri Court, and that was next in court on the 7th of next year.

“That was an unlawful use of motor vehicle and obstruct police and a drive disqualified from around about August.

“And then there was a further unlawful use of motor vehicle from the 6th of December.

“His involvement in that 6th of December matter was, the allegation was that he was a passenger in the vehicle.

“And then I appeared for him on the last day of the Mackay court sittings on the 17th - Mr Brown was arrested for a breach of bail.

“Police conducted a curfew check at (a Mackay residence) and Mr Brown didn’t present for the curfew check.

“He was granted bail again on the 17th.”

Mr Muirhead said he was concerned about the risk of Mr Brown reoffending if granted bail, based on his previous criminal behaviour.

The solicitor replied: “A key consideration Your Honour, of course, in deciding whether cause is shown and connected to risk as well is, the strength of the Crown case.

“The bail affidavit doesn’t address - most of the bail objection affidavits have a specific section in them saying strength of the evidence. This one doesn’t.

“But with reading it, it can be gleamed that the evidence against Mr Brown seems to be that the police officer pursuing that vehicle has identified Mr Brown by sight.

“It doesn’t say whether Mr Brown is known to that officer. It doesn’t talk about any distinguishing features that Mr Brown has... it doesn’t mention anything about his clothing.

“Mr Brown instructs that he has an alibi for that time period and that there are at least three people can back up his alibi, and that he wasn’t driving that car.

“Putting aside the breach of bail, that would see four of the five other charges Mr Brown would be pleading not guilty to - so the drive disqualified, the unlawful use, the evade police and the dangerous operation. The obstruct police, I’ll need to take some further instructions on that one.”

The solicitor said if granted bail, Mr Brown could reside with his aunty, halfway between the two police stations in Mackay.

“If he was to be granted bail and reporting conditions were considered, it could be either at Mackay (Police) Station or Northern Beaches Police Station.”

In objecting to bail, police prosecutor Clancy Fox said Mr Brown was an unacceptable risk of committing further offences and breaching bail conditions.

“Whilst my friend has submitted that it is not positively stated in the affidavit that the officer knows the defendant, it can be inferred from the words of the affidavit that he knows the defendant,” Mr Fox said.

“And also in my submission, the evidence in relation to identification is stronger, particularly where it’s stated: ‘The defendant’s window was down... was down at the time of passing police. The defendant drove at a slow speed. Police were able to observe the defendant. It’s accepted it was for a short period of time. They observed a female wearing grey clothing in the vehicle laying on the rear seat. At the time of passing police, the defendant and police both turned their heads looking at each other and they had a clear, unobstructed view of the driver.’ There is then the words ‘identifying him as James Charles Brown, the defendant in this matter.’

“It’s able to be inferred from that, in my submission, that the police officer knows the defendant.

“And that’s not such a stretch when one considers his criminal history which is prolific, Your Honour, of similar offences of unlawful use of a motor vehicle and evasions which he has pleaded guilty to in the past.

“The dangerous operation, which includes him entering the wrong side of the road on several occasions, including driving over crests and blind corners at times, entering an intersection making a sharp right turn on the wrong side of the road and into oncoming traffic, causing traffic to brake suddenly to avoid colliding with the defendant, shows that he poses a very significant risk to the community, a risk to himself of having an accident as well.”

Mr Fox told Mr Muirhead that it was a “strong Crown case” and if Mr Brown was convicted of the offences he would be required to serve a period of imprisonment “for a necessarily significant portion of actual time in custody.”

Before making his ruling, Mr Muirhead addressed Mr Brown’s criminal history.

“Over the last 12-odd years, since 2008, you’ve appeared in court on a fairly regular basis on numerous types of offences including fail to stop motor vehicles, evasion offences, and many other offences of a serious nature where prison terms have been imposed,” Mr Muirhead said.

“Now you’ve got a terrible criminal history as I explained before, and you’ve spent quite a bit of time in custody.

“In view of your previous record, and the charges before the court, the allegations against you which are unproven I appreciate that, there’s still a risk in my view that you may reoffend if granted bail.

“And if conditions are put on your bail, you may not comply with those conditions based on your past response to bail conditions.

“So bail is formally refused on the grounds that you’ve not shown cause, and as well, there is a risk that you may reoffend or not comply with bail conditions, and the level of that risk in my view is unacceptable.”

Mr Brown was remanded in custody to appear in court at Mackay on January 7.

Originally published as James Charles Brown, 30, refused bail after allegedly being involved in a police car chase