Analysis: Wait is over as Geraldton mayor has his time in court

The 17-month wait is over for Geraldton Mayor Shane Van Styn, who today goes to trial over an alleged assault on a man last year. Mr Van Styn, pictured, has maintained his innocence from his first appearance on April 18, 2019, previously saying he intended to “vigorously defend” the charge. He stands accused of assault occasioning bodily harm on a man in his 30s at the Kalbarri Motor Hotel on April 6 of the same year, and will be represented in Geraldton Court by prominent defence lawyer George Giudice. Last year the West Australian reported Mr Van Styn as saying the incident happened when he “stepped in to defend someone” at the venue. The trial, presided over by Magistrate Sandra De Maio, is expected to last two days, with criminal law barrister Simon Freitag SC acting as the prosecution. Leading Perth criminal defence lawyer Tom Percy QC said the burden of proof would be on the prosecution to prove the identity of the offender, that an assault occurred, and that the assault occasioned bodily harm. Ms De Maio, he said, would need to consider whether the assault was unlawful and consider possible defences “such as self-defence, perhaps accident, or perhaps provocation”. Mr Percy said, given the accused’s previous comments, it could be expected the defence may argue Mr Van Styn acted in self-defence. “The concept of self-defence extends to someone who aids another in their defence,” he said. “In a case like that ... it would be on the accused to establish that there was some evidence of that.” In that case, prosecutor Mr Frietag would then have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that self-defence couldn’t apply. Mr Van Styn’s status as mayor will not affect the trial and is an irrelevant factor, according to Mr Percy. “Unless it has some bearing on the way the offence was committed or the reason it was committed,” he said. “The case will be dealt with on the same basis as if he is a lay-person.” Should Mr Van Styn be found guilty of the assault, Ms De Maio will consider a range of factors such as the circumstances of the offending, the objective seriousness of the assault, and the extent of the offending to make a subjective assessment of an appropriate penalty. “I think in normal circumstances if a person is convicted of this offence where there’s no particularly serious injuries and the person had no prior convictions, the starting point would be a fine,” Mr Percy said.