The man charged with arson at Old Parliament House immediately went back to the historic building just 15 minutes after a court appearance in which he was banned from the ACT.
He was released on bail a second time in two days after his defence lawyer argued it was not an intentional breach of his bail conditions.
Firefighters responding at the fire-damaged front entrance of Old Parliament House following a protest, in Canberra on December 30.Credit:Alex Ellinghausen
The 30-year-old from Victoria, who cannot be named for legal reasons, appeared in court on Tuesday on charges relating to his allegedly carrying “hot coals” to the doors of Old Parliament House on December 30. The prosecution alleges he can be seen on videos posted on social media adding fuel to the fire and stoking it.
The fire came after repeated protests out the front of Old Parliament House, with many of those involved linked to sovereign citizen and anti-vaccination movements.
The man was given bail on the condition that he not enter the suburb of Parkes, except for on one occasion accompanied by police in order to collect his belongings from the encampment there.
However, the ACT Magistrates Court heard on Wednesday that once he was released from custody, “within less than 15 minutes” he was back at Old Parliament House.
Another man, who was in the car with the accused, was also arrested and charged with a driving offence.
Legal Aid solicitor Sam McLaughlin said the man facing the arson charge had misunderstood the bail conditions and had returned to the site with the intention of asking one of the police officers there monitoring the protesters to accompany him to retrieve his belongings.
“While he breached his bail, his breach was unintentional,” Mr McLaughlin said.
Prosecutor Kiara Sheridan argued the man should not be given bail again, saying he appeared “willing to breach those conditions to rejoin the protest movement”.
Magistrate Peter Morrison said he was prepared to give the man the benefit of the doubt and said the breach of bail conditions was “not a particularly serious one”.
However, he clearly read out each of the conditions to the man.
“I comprehend that and I agree to that,” the man replied.
He also promised to make arrangements for someone else to collect his belongings and bring them to him elsewhere in Canberra, before leaving the ACT on Thursday.
On Tuesday, the man’s lawyer successfully sought a non-publication order over his name and address, arguing that the police had suggested his safety was at risk of public retribution.
Most Viewed in Politics
From our partners
Source: Read Full Article
