Former police officer Beau Lamarre-Condon's legal team withdraws from alleged murder case
Beau Lamarre-Condon is yet to enter a plea as his case remains in the Local Court nearly 18 months after his arrest.
On Tuesday, prosecutors opposed a further adjournment by arguing it would be unreasonable after two case conferences and "many, many months" of negotiations.
The 30-year-old was charged with two counts of domestic violence-related murder after Mr Baird and Mr Davies disappeared last February.
Their bodies were found at a rural area in Bungonia, 200 kilometres south west of Sydney, about a week after Mr Lamarre-Condon's arrest.
Detectives have alleged a police-issued handgun was used in Mr Baird's Paddington home, where a large amount of blood was found.
Mr Lamarre-Condon's case has been with Legal Aid since late last year, after he was previously represented by John Walford.
Barrister Alex Terracini on Tuesday sought permission for himself and other members of the publicly-funded defence team to withdraw from the matter.
"An issue has arisen which means we cannot continue in the matter," he told the Local Court in Sydney's John Maddison Tower.
However, the court was told since the "issue" became apparent on Monday, Legal Aid acted quickly to find alternative representation and lawyer Ben Archbold will take over.
Brendan Donnelly, for the Director of Public Prosecutions, told the magistrate the Crown was "ready for this matter to proceed to trial" and argued there had been "plenty of opportunities" for a decision on pleas to be made.
"These murders allegedly occurred in February last year," he said.
"The Crown's submission is that further delay on the question of committal is unreasonable in the circumstances."
Mr Lamarre-Condon did not appear on screen for the mention but his mother, Coleen Lamarre, attended court.
Magistrate Christopher Halburd said the developments meant Mr Lamarre-Condon was "unrepresented on an incredibly serious charge".
Noting that members of the Baird and Davies families had requested to dial in via a link, the magistrate said his decision was whether or not it would be in the interests of justice to grant another adjournment.
But Magistrate Halburd said if the adjournment was not granted, Mr Lamarre-Condon would lose the opportunity of speaking with his new representation before entering a plea.
"A further six weeks in the scheme of this matter is not a long time," he said.
The magistrate said it was "appropriate" that no further details about the issue prompting the defence team's withdrawal were disclosed to him.
The magistrate ruled it was in the interests of justice to allow the adjournment, describing the matters as "complex" and congratulating Legal Aid on having "leapt into action" quickly.
The case returns to court on August 26.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
6 minutes ago
- ABC News
Experts say forcing companies to delete data would remove cybercrime 'honey pot '
Giving Australians the right to force the removal of their personal details from company databases would help combat the growing impact of mass data theft, experts say. More than 25 million customer accounts have been exposed in just three cyber attacks involving major companies in Qantas, Optus and Medibank. University of Queensland cyber security expert Ryan Ko says the number of Australians exposed to the risk of cybercrimes such as identity fraud or extortion is "increasing by the day". "There's no way you can tell how the leaked information is going to be used," he said. Professor Ko says there is no end in sight to these mass data heists. He says that is because highly-organised and opportunistic cybercriminal gangs — some of them state-backed — are well-placed to sniff out the weaknesses of most Australian companies whose "current practice and governance structures [are] not set up to be cyber-resilient". This is despite Australia ranking as the world's number one state in cyber defence, according to a Harvard University report in September 2022. That same month, about 9.8 million Optus customers learned that hackers had accessed their sensitive data including names, birth dates, and in some cases home addresses and passport numbers. In Queensland alone, the state government had to replace more than 178,000 driver licences. The hackers exploited security flaws including a publicly available application programming interface. The next month, hackers targeted Medibank with a ransomware attack, threatening to release the medical records of 9.7 million people on the dark web. The hackers allegedly swiped an IT staffer's sign-in credentials from his private computer, exploiting Medibank's lack of safeguards such as multi-factor authentication, and its alleged failure to act on alerts and warnings from consultants about system weaknesses. The 2022 breaches exposed the details of not only current but also former customers of both Optus and Medibank. Qantas claimed to have learned from these earlier scandals by deleting old customer data. But last month it suffered an attack via its call centre in the Philippines, which exposed details of 5.7 million current Frequent Flyer customers. More than a million people came to learn these included their addresses, reportedly including a federal MP who criticised Qantas for not being "upfront about the extent of personal details accessed at the start". The airline yesterday said it had found no evidence yet of stolen data being released but was "actively monitoring". It took out an interim injunction in the New South Wales Supreme Court to "prevent the stolen data from being accessed, viewed, released, used, transmitted or published by anyone". Corporate accountability in Australia — and the prospect of people being compensated for harm by sharing in penalties on corporations that fail to protect their sensitive data — can be a long time coming. The federal government watchdog, the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OIAC) is still investigating the Optus breach almost three years on. The Australian Communications and Media Authority sued Optus in the Federal Court with the matter still ongoing. The OIAC's pursuit of penalties against Medibank also remains with the Federal Court. And there are several class actions by law firms against Medibank which remain on foot. The 2022 breaches did spur privacy reforms by the federal government in December, including greater powers for the OIAC, which can now hit companies with fines of up to $50 million for serious breaches (up from $2.2 million). With regulator crackdowns and legal battles taking years, some experts say there is another proposed reform to address public distrust of companies holding their personal information. This is the "right to erasure", which would allow people to force companies to explain what personal information they hold, what they do with it, and to delete or de-identify that information. Privacy experts such as University of New South Wales academic Katharine Kemp have argued that companies use a "self-serving" interpretation of current guidelines to collect as much customer information as they can, use it for more and hold it for longer. The right to erasure, which has been in place in Europe since 2018, would help stop damaging data hacks, they say. And it is a right that 90 per cent of Australians support, according a 2023 survey of about 1,600 people by the OIAC. James North, who heads the technology practice at law firm Corrs Chambers Westgarth, says there is "a growing sense in the community that … people want more control over their data". He says people have the right to "have the data about you corrected ... but you don't have an explicit right to say, 'Don't use my personal data'". "So that reform would give individuals more control over their data," Mr North says. "I'm obviously not a privacy advocate, I work for big clients and assist them to comply with laws. "But data minimisation, not collecting data that's not required for identity checks for example, and having these avenues for consumers to understand what information companies have about them and making sure that it's appropriate — and for companies to delete information when it's no longer required — it's much better than having a breach and then a class action. "That's in no-one's interests." Professor Ko says the reform would be "a great move, and a great direction, especially given the fact that individuals can hold companies or organisations to account". "In terms of implementation, if it's just within an organisation, the right to erasure is actually technically possible," he says. "It also gives the organisations an opportunity to look into how to communicate that with customers, like, 'If we collect your data, it's used for this, and when you're no longer a customer with us, we'll be deleting this, and you know you can call us'. The Albanese government agreed "in-principle" to the reform in 2023, subject to exceptions in the public interest, including for law enforcement and national security. A spokesman for Federal Attorney-General Michelle Rowland says the government is "aware of the significant impacts of data breaches on people whose personal information has been compromised, often without their knowledge, and is committed to protecting the privacy of all Australians". He says the government is "continuing work on a further tranche of reforms". But he declined to say when it planned to introduce them - or whether they would include a right to erasure. "The government is taking the time needed to get the balance right between protecting people's personal information and allowing it to be used in ways that benefit individuals, society and the economy," he says. "We know this is a complex policy area and engages a wide range of stakeholders with diverse perspectives and interests."
Daily Telegraph
6 minutes ago
- Daily Telegraph
Jon Adgemis mother's house repossessed, prepared for sale
The Rose Bay home that embattled pub baron Jon Adgemis owns with his mother has been repossessed by financiers. The six-bedroom home on a 567sqm block at 2A Conway Ave, where Mr Adgemis's mother and grandson had been living, now has signs on the doors saying 'the mortgagee is in possession of this property'. The note advises that the 'mortagee has secured all doors and windows and will prosecute you if you trespass upon or in the property'. There are padlocks on the gates, the property has been emptied of furniture and TVs have been pulled from the walls. The Daily Telegraph reported last month that Mr Adgemis's Public Hospitality Group has a whopping $500m in debts. MORE: Australia's most bitter celeb divorces MORE: Hemsworth's Aus esky drink hole in receivership A call around of eastern suburbs agents has revealed that Fred Small of Laing and Simmons Double Bay has been appointed to sell it, and the property is now being prepared for sale. Mr Small has been approached for comment. Reports emerged in late May in the Australian Financial Review alleging that the former KPMG dealmaker mortgaged the property behind his mother's back. Mr Adgemis's mother had been in the Supreme Court trying to keep the property, as La Trobe Financial sought to claim it as part of efforts to recoup $6.2m that Adgemis borrowed to finance his business. The Supreme Court heard that his mother 'does not recall and has no record of ever receiving' any legal documents. It was also alleged that the mortgage was taken without her knowledge or authority. La Trobe had applied to the court to repossess the Rose Bay house, that last traded for $4.45m in 2018. Double Bay agents estimate the property would now be worth between $7m and $8m. The land title includes a long list of caveats from creditors, including the chief commissioner of state revenue. The hospitality boss has been battling to keep his faltering hospitality empire — which included Oxford House, pubs The Lady Hampshire and the Camelia Grove and Noahs Backpackers — out of the hands of liquidators as he faced hundres of millions of dollars in debt. Mr Adgemis now lives in a Bondi apartment owned by billionaire fund manager Will Vicars, having moved out of the Point Piper 'Bang & Olufsen' waterfront house owned by Jerry Yafu Qiu, in exchange for property maintenance. MORE: Kyle Sandilands' love nest sells
News.com.au
32 minutes ago
- News.com.au
Denise Richards says estranged husband Aaron Phypers tried to kill her during marriage in bombshell abuse claims
Denise Richards has been granted a restraining order against her estranged husband, Aaron Phypers, after she accused him of abusing her. In court documents filed on Wednesday, the Wild Things actor details several alleged violent altercations she has had with the Leap actor, including him threatening to kill her and himself if she ever reported him to the cops, according to website TMZ. 'Throughout our relationship, Aaron would frequently violently choke me, violently squeeze my head with both hands, tightly squeeze my arms, violently slap me in my face and head, aggressively slam my head into the bathroom towel rack,' Richards reportedly writes in the documents, per Page Six. The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills star, 54, also claims Phypers, 52, bruised her eye during one of his attacks in 2022. At the time, Richards alleges in the documents that she and her ex were at his Malibu, California, workplace, when he 'became paranoid' that the plants he purchased 'contained listening devices'. The mum of three then claims Phypers called her a 'f**king bitch' while hitting her in the eye with the palm of his hand. In another incident, Richards claims Phypers allegedly became violent after she suggested he didn't accompany her on a work trip. 'Aaron grabbed me by the back of my head by my hair and slammed me into the ground and screamed, 'You are not cancelling my flight, I am going with you and I do not trust you,'' she writes in the documents. Richards also included photos of her bruised arms, which she claims came from her estranged husband. Per TMZ, Phypers has been ordered to stay around 100 metres from Richards and her property, including her home and car. Their next restraining order hearing is scheduled for August 8. As Page Six previously reported, Phypers filed for divorce on July 7 after six years of marriage. He listed their separation date as July 4 and cited 'irreconcilable differences' as the reason for their split. Phypers also requested that the court grant him spousal support. A source told the Daily Mail last week that Richards and Phypers were 'toxic' and constantly fighting. 'They have been having trouble for some time, but they had a row over the weekend where they basically were like, 'F**k you,' and he marched off to file for divorce,' the insider claimed. Days after filing for divorce, Phypers was seen running errands without his wedding ring on. The reality star and Phypers tied the knot in September 2018.
