Sixth Young Man Arrested After Train Station Affray

By Poppy Morandin and Jimmy Singh.

 

An intimidating scene in which young men were seen wielding knives, a hammer and a machete at Rooty Hill train station has already led to six teens being charged.

The incident allegedly begun as a male armed with a machete threatened commuters, before being met by four other males, brandishing knives, and a hammer.

Three teens with the knives and hammer were filmed by station CCTV threatening the teen with the machete on the stairs to the platform, amid afternoon peak hour.

Frank Bosco is the latest teen to be charged, with the 18-year-old now facing charges of affray, being armed with intent to commit an indictable offence, and having goods in custody reasonably suspected of being stolen.

Mr Bosco was arrested early this week, where he was taken to Mount Druitt Police station.

He was later refused bail at Mount Druitt Local Court.

Despite the court hearing of the young man’s prospects of starting a new job and having no prior record, Magistrate Stephen Corry stated that: “It would be an unacceptable risk to the community with the defendant at large.

“This is an offence that occurred in the afternoon at a Sydney railway station that involved an affray incident involving a number of people armed with weapons,

“It was on a Friday at 4.30pm when one would expect members of the public were around and would have been confronted by this.”

The alleged affray has also led to the arrest of two sixteen-year old’s and three seventeen-year old’s.

The alarming video, lead to extensive investigations conducted by officers from Police Transport Command. Operation Invertice is being launched by police, which has aims to limit anti-social and violent behaviour on the public transport network.

A search warrant granted after investigations into one of the 16-year-old boys has also led to the arrest of a 42-year old man, with the pair arrested at a Ropes Crossing dwelling.

The man was charged with a total of 14 offences including two counts of supply prohibited drug, possess a prohibited weapon, handle explosive/precursor without authorising licence, six counts of possess prohibited drug, three counts of possess/attempt to, prescribed restricted substance, and goods suspected of being stolen.

The media has claimed that the teens involved in the train station affray are from the rival gangs “Inner West Brotherhood” and “Outer West Brotherhood” with police confirming the groups’ connection to “other violent brawls,” including an affray outside Parramatta Westfield in June 2019.

Natasha Squarey reporting for 7 News described it as a “long-running feud over rap music.”

Inner West Brotherhood has been connected to rap groups ’21 District’ and ‘Sydney Yungins’, whereas the Outer West of Sydney has been connected to infamous group ‘Onefour’.

Late last year, ‘Onefour’ members Pio Misa and Dahcell Ramos were imprisoned following a brawl at a Western Sydney pub. Misa faces four years in prison, with a two year non-parole period whereas Ramos, was sentenced to 10 years in prison, with a non-parole period of four years.

During the altercation Misa used a chair leg to hit his victim twice in the back of the head, whilst Ramos used a hammer to hit another man in the head several times.

Strike Force Imbala was set up late last year by NSW Police to address the conflict between the various gangs.

Pursuant to section 93C of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) a person who uses or threatens violence towards another person, and whose conduct would cause a person of ‘reasonable firmness’ present at the scene to fear for their safety will face a maximum penalty of 10 years in jail for affray.

A threat cannot be made by the use of words alone.

When two or more persons are involved, their conduct will be taken together for the purposes of considering whether a person present would hold a reasonable fear.

The ‘person of reasonable firmness’ prescribed in the legislation is often hypothetical in that an accused may be found guilty of affray, even if no other uninvolved person was at the scene, or was even likely to be at the scene, to observe the violence.

The offence can be committed in private as well as public places.

A person is guilty of affray only if the person intends to use or threaten violence or is aware that his or her conduct may be violent or threaten violence (s93D(2) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW).

As affray usually involves a continuous course of conduct, it has been found that the prosecution does not need to identify or prove any one particular incident but rather a general nature of conduct as a whole (Smith [1997] 1 Cr App R 14).

There are concerns that due to administrative reasons, and for the purposes of maximizing certainty of convictions and the severity of sentences the prosecution may charge under the offence of affray rather than for example, common assault. Whilst affray carries a maximum sentence of imprisonment for 10 years, common assault carries a penalty of 2 years in jail.

Affray is often preferred over offences which are perceived more difficult to prove. This is due to the prosecution not having to go through the difficulties of producing a victim who is willing to provide evidence, due to the function of the ‘hypothetical’ third person test in affray.

Have a question? Call our team today, our friendly criminal lawyers are specialise in affray charges and offer a free consult.

About Criminal Defence Lawyers Australia

Criminal Defence Lawyers Australia are Leading Criminal Defence Lawyers, Delivering Exceptional Results in all Australian Courts.

FEATURED ON:

  What Our Clients Say

Tayla Regan represented me and got me the perfect result against all odds. The way she handled the entire process and had me in the loop with her way of… (read full review) By M.M. on 15/10/2018
I am stunned by the result. I have been to four lawyers before met with Jimmy and Tayla. Very caring listening experience understanding lawyer and my result with this Criminal… (read full review) By A.E. on 18/10/2018
Tayla Regan was the best lawyer we could have asked for. She handled our case with an amazing attitude and worked tirelessly until she acheived the result we wanted. Was… (read full review) By D.P. on 10/10/2018
Living in WA I needed to find a Law firm and Lawyer to represent me in a Vexatious application in NSW. They couldn't act for me till I had transferred… (read full review) By B.B. on 25/09/2018
Tayla Regan helped me dramatically to achieve a section 10. She helped me gather all of the required material I needed for my case and also gathered a lot of… (read full review) By K.J. on 23/09/2018

Free Conference Booking Form

Follow Us