World

Queensland social media influencer accused of torturing one-year-old for money and fame granted bail | Queensland

Queensland social media influencer accused of torturing one-year-old for money and fame granted bail | Queensland


A social media influencer who allegedly gave her baby multiple drugs to film her in “immense distress” in a plan to gain fame and money online has been granted bail by a Queensland magistrate.

On Wednesday morning, magistrate Stephen Courtney accepted the arguments of lawyer Mathew Cuskelly that any risk his 34-year-old client, who cannot be named for legal reasons, posed to her now 18-month-old daughter could be ameliorated by strict conditions.

The defence lawyer proposed that contact be limited to video calls with the 18-month-old and supervised visits with her other children, and that she have no contact with potential witnesses.

Cuskelly had also argued on Tuesday that the case against his client was largely circumstantial and that its complexity meant it might be years before the Sunshine Coast mother faced trial.

She was not considered a risk of skipping bail nor suicide.

On Tuesday, crown prosecutor Jack Scott alleged that the woman’s alleged manufacturing of symptoms in her child with a cocktail of drugs not prescribed for her daughter had caused her to have a cardiac arrest and concerned her doctors to the extent that they undertook what in hindsight was unnecessary and high-risk brain surgeries to remove benign tumours.

Police allege the woman’s poisoning and torture of her child occurred over several months last year, while the baby girl was in hospital with a legitimate and treatable health condition.

Courtney said that the case against the woman appeared strong and that, were she to be convicted of 11 charges that include torture as a domestic violence offence, administering various drugs with intent to injure and also fraud, she would probably be imprisoned for several years “with actual time to be served”.

But the magistrate also said it was his duty not to be “overwhelmed” by the nature of allegations “so offensive to right-thinking people”, but instead be guided by the bail act, which sets out the conditions by which bail can be refused.

Most relevant among these are the safety of the alleged victim and perpetrator, interfering with witnesses or otherwise obstructing the course of justice – all of which he decided could be addressed by conditions of bail.

Much of the prosecution’s case against the woman, he said, rested upon medical evidence, the testimony of health professionals, CCTV footage and her own social media posts, which had either been obtained or could not be influenced by the accused.

Courtney ruled a member of the child safety department must supervise any audiovisual contact with the alleged victim and any in-person contact with her other children. The woman will only be allowed contact with the alleged victim’s father, her then partner, via a lawyer. He has alleged that she admitted to him to administering medication not prescribed for the toddler.

The magistrate also considered the amount of time the accused might otherwise be held in custody without having faced trial, saying “a reasonable estimate” was that might by two or three years away “if the matter remains contested”.

Courtney added that a guilty plea would see the matter “progress much quicker”.

“I must say I’ve wrestled with this,” the magistrate said.

“It’s one of the more difficult parts of my job, deciding whether to deprive someone of their liberty who hasn’t yet been convicted of any offence.

“No bail is completely risk-free, but I’m satisfied that the risk is sufficiently mitigated, otherwise I wouldn’t have done what I have done.”

After determining the conditions of bail, the magistrate then addressed the accused directly, who was appearing on Wednesday via video link from where she was being held in custody.

“You understand that police robustly were resisting your being released on bail?” he asked.

“Yes, I understand,” she responded.

“You understand they’ll be keeping an eye on you?

“Yes, I understand.

“You understand that any suggestion, any hint, of these conditions being breached, you’ll be sitting in custody, I would have thought for a couple of years, pending your trial?”

“Absolutely,” she responded. “Understood”.

Her next committal mention is scheduled for 17 February.

Article by:Source: Joe Hinchliffe

Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Most Popular

To Top
Follow Us