Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: R v McMaster [2017] NSWSC 1063 Hearing dates: 14 August 2017 Date of orders: 16 August 2017 Decision date: 16 August 2017 Jurisdiction: Common Law Before: Harrison J Decision: Bail refused Catchwords: BAIL – possess unauthorised firearm – intimidation – handle firearm while intoxicated – possess shortened firearm – strong Crown case – where weapon has not been located – whether risks to the community can be adequately addressed by bail conditions Category: Principal judgment Parties: Alex McMaster (Applicant) Crown (Respondent) Representation: Solicitors: Phillip Ryan Solicitors (Applicant) Director of Public Prosecutions (Respondent) File Number(s): 2017/176409 Publication restriction: Nil Judgment 1. HIS HONOUR: Alex McMaster applies for bail. He is charged with a series of offences that are alleged to have occurred on 16 April 2017 at Werrington. Specifically, the Crown alleges that Mr McMaster was in possession of an unauthorised firearm, being similar to a 12 gauge Japanese Stirling model single barrel shotgun. The barrel had been shortened. Mr McMaster is also charged with handling the firearm whilst intoxicated and intimidating Bailee Tease with the intention of causing her physical or mental harm. 2. Briefly, the police allege that around 6am on 16 April 2017 Ms Tease was awoken by calls to her mobile phone. She recognised the caller as Mr McMaster. She did not answer the calls but they continued. When she finally answered one of these calls she made it clear to Mr McMaster that she did not wish to speak to him. Mr McMaster thereafter continued to send her sms messages. 3. Later that morning Mr McMaster drove to Ms Tease's premises. She approached him in the vehicle and observed what appeared to be a firearm on the passenger seat of his car. Mr McMaster was holding it with his left hand. Ms Tease somehow had both the opportunity and the presence of mind to take photographs that depict Mr McMaster seated in the car as well as the firearm on the passenger seat. These photographs are in the material provided to me. Ms Tease then returned to her house. Before she did so Mr McMaster is alleged to have placed the barrel of the firearm onto the ledge of the open driver's side door, and pointed it at Ms Tease. His finger was on the trigger. Ms Tease was fearful that she was going to be shot. 4. Mr McMaster then opened his door and stepped out of the vehicle. He placed the firearm under his hoodie, still apparently holding it in his right hand. He ultimately returned to the vehicle and drove away. 5. Mr McMaster was subsequently arrested. He denied having held anything in the way claimed by Ms Tease. When shown the photographs that were taken by Ms Tease, he suggested that the item shown was either a metal pole or a paint roller. He said that he threw it from his vehicle when driving home. Mr McMaster refused to co-operate with the police and would not reveal the location of the rifle. He has still not done so. Mr McMaster admitted that he was severely intoxicated with a combination of alcohol and drugs, namely cocaine, that he had consumed throughout the previous night leading up to the incident. 6. All matters are listed for mention in the Penrith Local Court in October 2017. The full brief has not yet been served. Mr McMaster has been in custody bail refused since the date of his arrest on 16 April 2017. The matters are scheduled to be heard as indictable matters in the District Court. 7. The application is opposed. The Crown case is strong. The photographs appear clearly to confirm the identity of Mr McMaster and just as clearly show him sitting in a motor vehicle with what appears to be a shortened shotgun next to him on the passenger seat. The Crown is concerned that Mr McMaster has a significant drug addiction and an ongoing and irrational attraction to Ms Tease who is his former partner. It would appear as well that Mr McMaster has an attraction to firearms, and has previous convictions for unlicensed handling or possession of a firearm. Ms Tease has indicated that she may on some occasions have received as many as 100 contacts from him on certain days and that she has been in fear of him for some time. Mr McMaster is also alleged to have made specific threats of violence toward her and her family. 8. Mr McMaster was born in September 1992 and is accordingly almost 25 years of age. He has not previously been in custody. It is proposed that if bail were granted he would reside on a rural property near Singleton with no mobile phone or internet connection. He would therefore be physically separated from Ms Tease and restricted to the premises apart from any reporting requirements that might be imposed. Telephone reporting to police by way of a landline to the rural property has been suggested in order to obviate the need to travel large distances to report to police, as the nearest reporting station is said to be in excess of 100 kilometres from the property. 9. But for one particular matter I would have considered that these, and associated conditions, would have been sufficient to ameliorate the Crown's bail concerns that Mr McMaster might approach Ms Tease, possibly in an intoxicated condition, and cause her harm. That matter is Mr McMaster's continuing disinclination to reveal the whereabouts of the shortened firearm depicted in the photographs. The police have attempted to locate the weapon without success and remain concerned that Mr McMaster will, or may, have unrestrained access to it if released. That is a not unreasonable concern in my opinion. I would have been somewhat differently disposed to this application if that item had been recovered and secured by the police. 10. In these circumstances I am not satisfied that the risk of committing a further serious offence or of endangering a member of the community can be adequately addressed by the imposition of any suitable bail conditions. I consider that Mr McMaster presents an unacceptable risk and that bail should be refused. Whether or not another application for release would be considered differently if Mr McMaster surrendered the firearm is not a matter to which I am presently required to direct my attention. ********** DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated. Decision last updated: 16 August 2017