❓ A WA parliamentary question on notice regarding the parole and bail of convicted serial criminal Jason Wimbridge, revealing concerns about the handling of the case and a subsequent police investigation.
AnsweredQoN 571Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I have given quite a lot of notice of this question. I refer to my question yesterday to the Attorney General on convicted serial criminal Jason Wimbridge, and to the Attorney General’s confirmation that his parole was cancelled following a request from the Department of Justice. I also refer to the fact that, for some inexplicable reason, his parole was reinstated. (1) What offences did he commit while on parole, and on what dates? (2) For which of those offences has he been charged by the police, and when were the respective court appearances on those charges? (3) On what date did he go to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane? (4) What were the reasons for his being granted bail? (5) On what date did the Department of Justice request that his parole be cancelled? (6) On what date did the Parole Board decide to cancel his parole? (7) The Attorney General has intimated that he does not have the answer to the question I was going to ask, so I will put it in slightly different terms. The original question read, “Who, specifically, requested his re-release on parole and on what date?” I now ask: were the police involved in requesting the re-release on parole of that criminal; and, if yes, on what date? The SPEAKER : I say for the information of staff members who assist in writing members’ questions that that question is probably too long. We are trying to keep questions and answers short to allow question time to be completed. That purpose is defeated if the question is longer than the answer. I ask people to bear that in mind. It is an important issue. Mr J.A. McGINTY
AnswerView source ↗
(1) Mr Wimbridge has not been found guilty of any offences at this stage, but he has been charged with the following offences: aggravated armed robbery, stealing a motor vehicle and possession of a drug with intent to supply and sell on 2 July; reckless driving on 22 July; aggravated burglary, criminal damage by fire and aggravated armed robbery on 5 September; and attempted aggravated armed robbery, grievous bodily harm and stealing a motor vehicle on 19 September. I put one caveat on that answer: the information I have provided is not necessarily in its final, complete form. I relayed that point to the member at the start of question time. In other words, if there is any change to the information that I have provided in answer to this question, I will advise the member directly. Mr R.F. Johnson : By four o’clock today? Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(1) What offences did he commit while on parole, and on what dates? (2) For which of those offences has he been charged by the police, and when were the respective court appearances on those charges? (3) On what date did he go to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane? (4) What were the reasons for his being granted bail? (5) On what date did the Department of Justice request that his parole be cancelled? (6) On what date did the Parole Board decide to cancel his parole? (7) The Attorney General has intimated that he does not have the answer to the question I was going to ask, so I will put it in slightly different terms. The original question read, “Who, specifically, requested his re-release on parole and on what date?” I now ask: were the police involved in requesting the re-release on parole of that criminal; and, if yes, on what date? The SPEAKER : I say for the information of staff members who assist in writing members’ questions that that question is probably too long. We are trying to keep questions and answers short to allow question time to be completed. That purpose is defeated if the question is longer than the answer. I ask people to bear that in mind. It is an important issue. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1) Mr Wimbridge has not been found guilty of any offences at this stage, but he has been charged with the following offences: aggravated armed robbery, stealing a motor vehicle and possession of a drug with intent to supply and sell on 2 July; reckless driving on 22 July; aggravated burglary, criminal damage by fire and aggravated armed robbery on 5 September; and attempted aggravated armed robbery, grievous bodily harm and stealing a motor vehicle on 19 September. I put one caveat on that answer: the information I have provided is not necessarily in its final, complete form. I relayed that point to the member at the start of question time. In other words, if there is any change to the information that I have provided in answer to this question, I will advise the member directly. Mr R.F. Johnson : By four o’clock today? Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(2) For which of those offences has he been charged by the police, and when were the respective court appearances on those charges? (3) On what date did he go to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane? (4) What were the reasons for his being granted bail? (5) On what date did the Department of Justice request that his parole be cancelled? (6) On what date did the Parole Board decide to cancel his parole? (7) The Attorney General has intimated that he does not have the answer to the question I was going to ask, so I will put it in slightly different terms. The original question read, “Who, specifically, requested his re-release on parole and on what date?” I now ask: were the police involved in requesting the re-release on parole of that criminal; and, if yes, on what date? The SPEAKER : I say for the information of staff members who assist in writing members’ questions that that question is probably too long. We are trying to keep questions and answers short to allow question time to be completed. That purpose is defeated if the question is longer than the answer. I ask people to bear that in mind. It is an important issue. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1) Mr Wimbridge has not been found guilty of any offences at this stage, but he has been charged with the following offences: aggravated armed robbery, stealing a motor vehicle and possession of a drug with intent to supply and sell on 2 July; reckless driving on 22 July; aggravated burglary, criminal damage by fire and aggravated armed robbery on 5 September; and attempted aggravated armed robbery, grievous bodily harm and stealing a motor vehicle on 19 September. I put one caveat on that answer: the information I have provided is not necessarily in its final, complete form. I relayed that point to the member at the start of question time. In other words, if there is any change to the information that I have provided in answer to this question, I will advise the member directly. Mr R.F. Johnson : By four o’clock today? Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(3) On what date did he go to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane? (4) What were the reasons for his being granted bail? (5) On what date did the Department of Justice request that his parole be cancelled? (6) On what date did the Parole Board decide to cancel his parole? (7) The Attorney General has intimated that he does not have the answer to the question I was going to ask, so I will put it in slightly different terms. The original question read, “Who, specifically, requested his re-release on parole and on what date?” I now ask: were the police involved in requesting the re-release on parole of that criminal; and, if yes, on what date? The SPEAKER : I say for the information of staff members who assist in writing members’ questions that that question is probably too long. We are trying to keep questions and answers short to allow question time to be completed. That purpose is defeated if the question is longer than the answer. I ask people to bear that in mind. It is an important issue. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1) Mr Wimbridge has not been found guilty of any offences at this stage, but he has been charged with the following offences: aggravated armed robbery, stealing a motor vehicle and possession of a drug with intent to supply and sell on 2 July; reckless driving on 22 July; aggravated burglary, criminal damage by fire and aggravated armed robbery on 5 September; and attempted aggravated armed robbery, grievous bodily harm and stealing a motor vehicle on 19 September. I put one caveat on that answer: the information I have provided is not necessarily in its final, complete form. I relayed that point to the member at the start of question time. In other words, if there is any change to the information that I have provided in answer to this question, I will advise the member directly. Mr R.F. Johnson : By four o’clock today? Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(4) What were the reasons for his being granted bail? (5) On what date did the Department of Justice request that his parole be cancelled? (6) On what date did the Parole Board decide to cancel his parole? (7) The Attorney General has intimated that he does not have the answer to the question I was going to ask, so I will put it in slightly different terms. The original question read, “Who, specifically, requested his re-release on parole and on what date?” I now ask: were the police involved in requesting the re-release on parole of that criminal; and, if yes, on what date? The SPEAKER : I say for the information of staff members who assist in writing members’ questions that that question is probably too long. We are trying to keep questions and answers short to allow question time to be completed. That purpose is defeated if the question is longer than the answer. I ask people to bear that in mind. It is an important issue. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1) Mr Wimbridge has not been found guilty of any offences at this stage, but he has been charged with the following offences: aggravated armed robbery, stealing a motor vehicle and possession of a drug with intent to supply and sell on 2 July; reckless driving on 22 July; aggravated burglary, criminal damage by fire and aggravated armed robbery on 5 September; and attempted aggravated armed robbery, grievous bodily harm and stealing a motor vehicle on 19 September. I put one caveat on that answer: the information I have provided is not necessarily in its final, complete form. I relayed that point to the member at the start of question time. In other words, if there is any change to the information that I have provided in answer to this question, I will advise the member directly. Mr R.F. Johnson : By four o’clock today? Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(5) On what date did the Department of Justice request that his parole be cancelled? (6) On what date did the Parole Board decide to cancel his parole? (7) The Attorney General has intimated that he does not have the answer to the question I was going to ask, so I will put it in slightly different terms. The original question read, “Who, specifically, requested his re-release on parole and on what date?” I now ask: were the police involved in requesting the re-release on parole of that criminal; and, if yes, on what date? The SPEAKER : I say for the information of staff members who assist in writing members’ questions that that question is probably too long. We are trying to keep questions and answers short to allow question time to be completed. That purpose is defeated if the question is longer than the answer. I ask people to bear that in mind. It is an important issue. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1) Mr Wimbridge has not been found guilty of any offences at this stage, but he has been charged with the following offences: aggravated armed robbery, stealing a motor vehicle and possession of a drug with intent to supply and sell on 2 July; reckless driving on 22 July; aggravated burglary, criminal damage by fire and aggravated armed robbery on 5 September; and attempted aggravated armed robbery, grievous bodily harm and stealing a motor vehicle on 19 September. I put one caveat on that answer: the information I have provided is not necessarily in its final, complete form. I relayed that point to the member at the start of question time. In other words, if there is any change to the information that I have provided in answer to this question, I will advise the member directly. Mr R.F. Johnson : By four o’clock today? Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(6) On what date did the Parole Board decide to cancel his parole? (7) The Attorney General has intimated that he does not have the answer to the question I was going to ask, so I will put it in slightly different terms. The original question read, “Who, specifically, requested his re-release on parole and on what date?” I now ask: were the police involved in requesting the re-release on parole of that criminal; and, if yes, on what date? The SPEAKER : I say for the information of staff members who assist in writing members’ questions that that question is probably too long. We are trying to keep questions and answers short to allow question time to be completed. That purpose is defeated if the question is longer than the answer. I ask people to bear that in mind. It is an important issue. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1) Mr Wimbridge has not been found guilty of any offences at this stage, but he has been charged with the following offences: aggravated armed robbery, stealing a motor vehicle and possession of a drug with intent to supply and sell on 2 July; reckless driving on 22 July; aggravated burglary, criminal damage by fire and aggravated armed robbery on 5 September; and attempted aggravated armed robbery, grievous bodily harm and stealing a motor vehicle on 19 September. I put one caveat on that answer: the information I have provided is not necessarily in its final, complete form. I relayed that point to the member at the start of question time. In other words, if there is any change to the information that I have provided in answer to this question, I will advise the member directly. Mr R.F. Johnson : By four o’clock today? Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(7) The Attorney General has intimated that he does not have the answer to the question I was going to ask, so I will put it in slightly different terms. The original question read, “Who, specifically, requested his re-release on parole and on what date?” I now ask: were the police involved in requesting the re-release on parole of that criminal; and, if yes, on what date? The SPEAKER : I say for the information of staff members who assist in writing members’ questions that that question is probably too long. We are trying to keep questions and answers short to allow question time to be completed. That purpose is defeated if the question is longer than the answer. I ask people to bear that in mind. It is an important issue. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1) Mr Wimbridge has not been found guilty of any offences at this stage, but he has been charged with the following offences: aggravated armed robbery, stealing a motor vehicle and possession of a drug with intent to supply and sell on 2 July; reckless driving on 22 July; aggravated burglary, criminal damage by fire and aggravated armed robbery on 5 September; and attempted aggravated armed robbery, grievous bodily harm and stealing a motor vehicle on 19 September. I put one caveat on that answer: the information I have provided is not necessarily in its final, complete form. I relayed that point to the member at the start of question time. In other words, if there is any change to the information that I have provided in answer to this question, I will advise the member directly. Mr R.F. Johnson : By four o’clock today? Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
The SPEAKER : I say for the information of staff members who assist in writing members’ questions that that question is probably too long. We are trying to keep questions and answers short to allow question time to be completed. That purpose is defeated if the question is longer than the answer. I ask people to bear that in mind. It is an important issue. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1) Mr Wimbridge has not been found guilty of any offences at this stage, but he has been charged with the following offences: aggravated armed robbery, stealing a motor vehicle and possession of a drug with intent to supply and sell on 2 July; reckless driving on 22 July; aggravated burglary, criminal damage by fire and aggravated armed robbery on 5 September; and attempted aggravated armed robbery, grievous bodily harm and stealing a motor vehicle on 19 September. I put one caveat on that answer: the information I have provided is not necessarily in its final, complete form. I relayed that point to the member at the start of question time. In other words, if there is any change to the information that I have provided in answer to this question, I will advise the member directly. Mr R.F. Johnson : By four o’clock today? Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1) Mr Wimbridge has not been found guilty of any offences at this stage, but he has been charged with the following offences: aggravated armed robbery, stealing a motor vehicle and possession of a drug with intent to supply and sell on 2 July; reckless driving on 22 July; aggravated burglary, criminal damage by fire and aggravated armed robbery on 5 September; and attempted aggravated armed robbery, grievous bodily harm and stealing a motor vehicle on 19 September. I put one caveat on that answer: the information I have provided is not necessarily in its final, complete form. I relayed that point to the member at the start of question time. In other words, if there is any change to the information that I have provided in answer to this question, I will advise the member directly. Mr R.F. Johnson : By four o’clock today? Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(1) Mr Wimbridge has not been found guilty of any offences at this stage, but he has been charged with the following offences: aggravated armed robbery, stealing a motor vehicle and possession of a drug with intent to supply and sell on 2 July; reckless driving on 22 July; aggravated burglary, criminal damage by fire and aggravated armed robbery on 5 September; and attempted aggravated armed robbery, grievous bodily harm and stealing a motor vehicle on 19 September. I put one caveat on that answer: the information I have provided is not necessarily in its final, complete form. I relayed that point to the member at the start of question time. In other words, if there is any change to the information that I have provided in answer to this question, I will advise the member directly. Mr R.F. Johnson : By four o’clock today? Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
Mr R.F. Johnson : By four o’clock today? Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(1) What offences did he commit while on parole, and on what dates? (2) For which of those offences has he been charged by the police, and when were the respective court appearances on those charges? (3) On what date did he go to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane? (4) What were the reasons for his being granted bail? (5) On what date did the Department of Justice request that his parole be cancelled? (6) On what date did the Parole Board decide to cancel his parole? (7) The Attorney General has intimated that he does not have the answer to the question I was going to ask, so I will put it in slightly different terms. The original question read, “Who, specifically, requested his re-release on parole and on what date?” I now ask: were the police involved in requesting the re-release on parole of that criminal; and, if yes, on what date? The SPEAKER : I say for the information of staff members who assist in writing members’ questions that that question is probably too long. We are trying to keep questions and answers short to allow question time to be completed. That purpose is defeated if the question is longer than the answer. I ask people to bear that in mind. It is an important issue. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1) Mr Wimbridge has not been found guilty of any offences at this stage, but he has been charged with the following offences: aggravated armed robbery, stealing a motor vehicle and possession of a drug with intent to supply and sell on 2 July; reckless driving on 22 July; aggravated burglary, criminal damage by fire and aggravated armed robbery on 5 September; and attempted aggravated armed robbery, grievous bodily harm and stealing a motor vehicle on 19 September. I put one caveat on that answer: the information I have provided is not necessarily in its final, complete form. I relayed that point to the member at the start of question time. In other words, if there is any change to the information that I have provided in answer to this question, I will advise the member directly. Mr R.F. Johnson : By four o’clock today? Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(2) For which of those offences has he been charged by the police, and when were the respective court appearances on those charges? (3) On what date did he go to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane? (4) What were the reasons for his being granted bail? (5) On what date did the Department of Justice request that his parole be cancelled? (6) On what date did the Parole Board decide to cancel his parole? (7) The Attorney General has intimated that he does not have the answer to the question I was going to ask, so I will put it in slightly different terms. The original question read, “Who, specifically, requested his re-release on parole and on what date?” I now ask: were the police involved in requesting the re-release on parole of that criminal; and, if yes, on what date? The SPEAKER : I say for the information of staff members who assist in writing members’ questions that that question is probably too long. We are trying to keep questions and answers short to allow question time to be completed. That purpose is defeated if the question is longer than the answer. I ask people to bear that in mind. It is an important issue. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1) Mr Wimbridge has not been found guilty of any offences at this stage, but he has been charged with the following offences: aggravated armed robbery, stealing a motor vehicle and possession of a drug with intent to supply and sell on 2 July; reckless driving on 22 July; aggravated burglary, criminal damage by fire and aggravated armed robbery on 5 September; and attempted aggravated armed robbery, grievous bodily harm and stealing a motor vehicle on 19 September. I put one caveat on that answer: the information I have provided is not necessarily in its final, complete form. I relayed that point to the member at the start of question time. In other words, if there is any change to the information that I have provided in answer to this question, I will advise the member directly. Mr R.F. Johnson : By four o’clock today? Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(3) On what date did he go to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane? (4) What were the reasons for his being granted bail? (5) On what date did the Department of Justice request that his parole be cancelled? (6) On what date did the Parole Board decide to cancel his parole? (7) The Attorney General has intimated that he does not have the answer to the question I was going to ask, so I will put it in slightly different terms. The original question read, “Who, specifically, requested his re-release on parole and on what date?” I now ask: were the police involved in requesting the re-release on parole of that criminal; and, if yes, on what date? The SPEAKER : I say for the information of staff members who assist in writing members’ questions that that question is probably too long. We are trying to keep questions and answers short to allow question time to be completed. That purpose is defeated if the question is longer than the answer. I ask people to bear that in mind. It is an important issue. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1) Mr Wimbridge has not been found guilty of any offences at this stage, but he has been charged with the following offences: aggravated armed robbery, stealing a motor vehicle and possession of a drug with intent to supply and sell on 2 July; reckless driving on 22 July; aggravated burglary, criminal damage by fire and aggravated armed robbery on 5 September; and attempted aggravated armed robbery, grievous bodily harm and stealing a motor vehicle on 19 September. I put one caveat on that answer: the information I have provided is not necessarily in its final, complete form. I relayed that point to the member at the start of question time. In other words, if there is any change to the information that I have provided in answer to this question, I will advise the member directly. Mr R.F. Johnson : By four o’clock today? Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(4) What were the reasons for his being granted bail? (5) On what date did the Department of Justice request that his parole be cancelled? (6) On what date did the Parole Board decide to cancel his parole? (7) The Attorney General has intimated that he does not have the answer to the question I was going to ask, so I will put it in slightly different terms. The original question read, “Who, specifically, requested his re-release on parole and on what date?” I now ask: were the police involved in requesting the re-release on parole of that criminal; and, if yes, on what date? The SPEAKER : I say for the information of staff members who assist in writing members’ questions that that question is probably too long. We are trying to keep questions and answers short to allow question time to be completed. That purpose is defeated if the question is longer than the answer. I ask people to bear that in mind. It is an important issue. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1) Mr Wimbridge has not been found guilty of any offences at this stage, but he has been charged with the following offences: aggravated armed robbery, stealing a motor vehicle and possession of a drug with intent to supply and sell on 2 July; reckless driving on 22 July; aggravated burglary, criminal damage by fire and aggravated armed robbery on 5 September; and attempted aggravated armed robbery, grievous bodily harm and stealing a motor vehicle on 19 September. I put one caveat on that answer: the information I have provided is not necessarily in its final, complete form. I relayed that point to the member at the start of question time. In other words, if there is any change to the information that I have provided in answer to this question, I will advise the member directly. Mr R.F. Johnson : By four o’clock today? Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(5) On what date did the Department of Justice request that his parole be cancelled? (6) On what date did the Parole Board decide to cancel his parole? (7) The Attorney General has intimated that he does not have the answer to the question I was going to ask, so I will put it in slightly different terms. The original question read, “Who, specifically, requested his re-release on parole and on what date?” I now ask: were the police involved in requesting the re-release on parole of that criminal; and, if yes, on what date? The SPEAKER : I say for the information of staff members who assist in writing members’ questions that that question is probably too long. We are trying to keep questions and answers short to allow question time to be completed. That purpose is defeated if the question is longer than the answer. I ask people to bear that in mind. It is an important issue. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1) Mr Wimbridge has not been found guilty of any offences at this stage, but he has been charged with the following offences: aggravated armed robbery, stealing a motor vehicle and possession of a drug with intent to supply and sell on 2 July; reckless driving on 22 July; aggravated burglary, criminal damage by fire and aggravated armed robbery on 5 September; and attempted aggravated armed robbery, grievous bodily harm and stealing a motor vehicle on 19 September. I put one caveat on that answer: the information I have provided is not necessarily in its final, complete form. I relayed that point to the member at the start of question time. In other words, if there is any change to the information that I have provided in answer to this question, I will advise the member directly. Mr R.F. Johnson : By four o’clock today? Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(6) On what date did the Parole Board decide to cancel his parole? (7) The Attorney General has intimated that he does not have the answer to the question I was going to ask, so I will put it in slightly different terms. The original question read, “Who, specifically, requested his re-release on parole and on what date?” I now ask: were the police involved in requesting the re-release on parole of that criminal; and, if yes, on what date? The SPEAKER : I say for the information of staff members who assist in writing members’ questions that that question is probably too long. We are trying to keep questions and answers short to allow question time to be completed. That purpose is defeated if the question is longer than the answer. I ask people to bear that in mind. It is an important issue. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1) Mr Wimbridge has not been found guilty of any offences at this stage, but he has been charged with the following offences: aggravated armed robbery, stealing a motor vehicle and possession of a drug with intent to supply and sell on 2 July; reckless driving on 22 July; aggravated burglary, criminal damage by fire and aggravated armed robbery on 5 September; and attempted aggravated armed robbery, grievous bodily harm and stealing a motor vehicle on 19 September. I put one caveat on that answer: the information I have provided is not necessarily in its final, complete form. I relayed that point to the member at the start of question time. In other words, if there is any change to the information that I have provided in answer to this question, I will advise the member directly. Mr R.F. Johnson : By four o’clock today? Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(7) The Attorney General has intimated that he does not have the answer to the question I was going to ask, so I will put it in slightly different terms. The original question read, “Who, specifically, requested his re-release on parole and on what date?” I now ask: were the police involved in requesting the re-release on parole of that criminal; and, if yes, on what date? The SPEAKER : I say for the information of staff members who assist in writing members’ questions that that question is probably too long. We are trying to keep questions and answers short to allow question time to be completed. That purpose is defeated if the question is longer than the answer. I ask people to bear that in mind. It is an important issue. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1) Mr Wimbridge has not been found guilty of any offences at this stage, but he has been charged with the following offences: aggravated armed robbery, stealing a motor vehicle and possession of a drug with intent to supply and sell on 2 July; reckless driving on 22 July; aggravated burglary, criminal damage by fire and aggravated armed robbery on 5 September; and attempted aggravated armed robbery, grievous bodily harm and stealing a motor vehicle on 19 September. I put one caveat on that answer: the information I have provided is not necessarily in its final, complete form. I relayed that point to the member at the start of question time. In other words, if there is any change to the information that I have provided in answer to this question, I will advise the member directly. Mr R.F. Johnson : By four o’clock today? Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
The SPEAKER : I say for the information of staff members who assist in writing members’ questions that that question is probably too long. We are trying to keep questions and answers short to allow question time to be completed. That purpose is defeated if the question is longer than the answer. I ask people to bear that in mind. It is an important issue. Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1) Mr Wimbridge has not been found guilty of any offences at this stage, but he has been charged with the following offences: aggravated armed robbery, stealing a motor vehicle and possession of a drug with intent to supply and sell on 2 July; reckless driving on 22 July; aggravated burglary, criminal damage by fire and aggravated armed robbery on 5 September; and attempted aggravated armed robbery, grievous bodily harm and stealing a motor vehicle on 19 September. I put one caveat on that answer: the information I have provided is not necessarily in its final, complete form. I relayed that point to the member at the start of question time. In other words, if there is any change to the information that I have provided in answer to this question, I will advise the member directly. Mr R.F. Johnson : By four o’clock today? Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
Mr J.A. McGINTY replied: (1) Mr Wimbridge has not been found guilty of any offences at this stage, but he has been charged with the following offences: aggravated armed robbery, stealing a motor vehicle and possession of a drug with intent to supply and sell on 2 July; reckless driving on 22 July; aggravated burglary, criminal damage by fire and aggravated armed robbery on 5 September; and attempted aggravated armed robbery, grievous bodily harm and stealing a motor vehicle on 19 September. I put one caveat on that answer: the information I have provided is not necessarily in its final, complete form. I relayed that point to the member at the start of question time. In other words, if there is any change to the information that I have provided in answer to this question, I will advise the member directly. Mr R.F. Johnson : By four o’clock today? Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(1) Mr Wimbridge has not been found guilty of any offences at this stage, but he has been charged with the following offences: aggravated armed robbery, stealing a motor vehicle and possession of a drug with intent to supply and sell on 2 July; reckless driving on 22 July; aggravated burglary, criminal damage by fire and aggravated armed robbery on 5 September; and attempted aggravated armed robbery, grievous bodily harm and stealing a motor vehicle on 19 September. I put one caveat on that answer: the information I have provided is not necessarily in its final, complete form. I relayed that point to the member at the start of question time. In other words, if there is any change to the information that I have provided in answer to this question, I will advise the member directly. Mr R.F. Johnson : By four o’clock today? Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
Mr R.F. Johnson : By four o’clock today? Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
Mr J.A. McGINTY : As soon as I can. I would expect that to be the case. (2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(2) I am not 100 per cent sure about the answer to this question. The answer I gave to (1) was my understanding of the offences he is alleged to have committed and for which he has been charged. Again, I will confirm that when I have more complete information. He appeared in court on 23 July. There may have been further dates, but I am not aware of them at this stage. (3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(3) He went to court and was granted bail by Magistrate Lane on 12 August. Bail was granted with a $100 000 by $100 000 surety, not $10 000, as has been reported in the media. (5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(5) The Department of Justice requested on 25 July that his parole be cancelled. (6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(6) The Parole Board made a decision on 9 August to cancel his parole. (4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
(4), (7) There are three outstanding questions to which I do not yet have an answer. We are working to try to achieve - Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
Mr R.F. Johnson : I think you might. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
Mr J.A. McGINTY : I cannot say that I know the answer to any of those questions. The first of those questions is why there was a closed hearing of the court on 12 August when Magistrate Barbara Lane granted bail. I do not know the answer to that question. I also do not know why she granted him bail when he was charged with a schedule 2 offence under the Bail Act, which stipulates that bail cannot be granted for such an offence except in exceptional circumstances. Bail was granted, and I do not know what the exceptional circumstances were. Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
Ms S.E. Walker : Well, find out. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am coming to that; all will be revealed. Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
Mr R.F. Johnson : You must have found out by now. You are the first law officer of this state. Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
Mr J.A. McGINTY : I am about to explain. The member for Hillarys should listen to the answer, given that he asked the question. The third of those questions asked why parole was granted after bail had been granted by the magistrate. Those are the questions that have been posed. They are matters of some concern. Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
Mr R.F. Johnson interjected. Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
Mr J.A. McGINTY : The member should let me conclude my answer. Yesterday I met with the Minister for Police and Emergency Services and the Commissioner of Police. We decided that these were serious matters of public interest that needed to be answered, and that we needed to get to the bottom of them. The Commissioner of Police indicated his strong view that the police, as a party to those proceedings, are entitled to a copy of the transcript of the proceedings under section 33(3) of the Magistrates Court Act. As such, an application has been made to the court for the police to be granted a copy of the transcript. A hearing has been listed for next Tuesday at 2.15 pm to try to obtain a copy of the transcript of the closed hearing before the magistrate. The Commissioner of Police has indicated that it is his desire that he and I work with the Minister for Police on this matter, with a view to ascertaining what went on. It is his desire to share with me the contents of the transcript of the hearing before Magistrate Lane so that we can be assured that community safety was taken into account. If access is gained to the transcript as a result of the hearing next Tuesday, we will be able to make a public statement about what transpired and why, in the face of schedule 2 of the Bail Act, this person was granted bail. I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
I will answer one question that was not asked. Further to these events, the Community Justice Services issued an arrest warrant and suspended the parole of Mr Wimbridge on 16 September. A bedside sitting was held yesterday, 21 September.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.