Lawyers acting for a teenager accused of attempting to hijack a Jetstar flight have revealed plans to argue he was suffering a mental impairment at the time.
The now 19-year-old, who cannot be named for legal reasons, appeared in a Children’s Court on Wednesday morning as prosecutors launched a bid to have the case sent to a higher court.
The teenager is accused of attempting to take control of a commercial flight at Avalon Airport in Geelong on March 6 last year, armed with a fake bomb and shotgun.
Wearing a high-vis vest and tool belt, it’s alleged the then-17-year-old entered the airport through a hole in a fence and boarded the plane, where he was tackled and restrained by a passenger.
WA’s biggest courts and crime stories to your inbox
Sign-up to our weekly newsletter for free
Sign up
New details about the alleged offending were aired in court on Wednesday as prosecutor Paul Holdenson KC argued there were good reasons for the case to be sent to a higher court for a jury trial.
These included allegations the boy had been “clearly committed” to the hijacking for some time and possessed “some sort of ideological and political motivation to do what he did”.
In response, defence barrister Patrick Doyle SC argued it was in the interest of justice for the Children’s Court to determine whether the boy was not guilty by way of mental impairment.
He said the psychological and psychiatric evidence was clear that the boy “was not thinking clearly at the time”.
“He was a young man under tremendous mental strain,“ Mr Doyle said.
The barrister said his client had co-operated with authorities from the outset and made full admissions that “went beyond admissions of the facts of the offending”.
As for the alleged political motivations, Mr Doyle said the prosecution had been unable to articulate what this allegedly was.
“What the background evidence of (the boy’s) political thinking indicates is the level of confusion in his mind,” he argued.
“What he says on this topic to the police is incoherent, with respect.”
Children’s Court president Judge Jack Vandersteen will hand down a decision on whether to uplift the matter to a higher court at a later date.