Accused Rocky bomb hoaxer gets bail, now for job interview
ACCUSED Rockhampton bomb hoax caller Adam Clifford Ramm has had a good start to his day.
Ramm and his co-accused mate, Kieran James Fyfe, were granted bail this morning.
Now, according to evidence presented during his bail application in the Rockhampton Magistrates Court, the 22-year-old Ramm has a job interview later today for a position with a fencing company.
While both Ramm and Fyfe were released from custody, Magistrate Catherine Benson delivered a verbal warning as well as put a number of bail conditions in place.
She told both men the likelihood was they would serve time behind bars if they were convicted.
In dealing with Ramm, she said she was confident the past two days of court appearances had left him in no doubt about how serious the legal system treated hoax calls.
Fyfe, 24, and Ramm, 22, both face two charges each of making bomb hoax calls. The charges carry a maximum five-year jail sentence.
Due to the serious nature of the charges, neither accused has entered pleas, as their matters need to be dealt with in the District Court jurisdiction.
Ramm's legal defence Pierre Lammersdorf told Ms Benson his client intended to plead guilty and had made admissions to police.
The pair are blaming each other for instigating the calls, the court heard.
Police allege the pair was drunk when they made a bomb hoax call to the JB Hi-Fi store that led to the evacuation of Stockland Rockhampton on June 22.
CQ's busiest shopping centre was evacuated during the late night Thursday shopping period.
The pair is accused of earlier that day making another hoax call to a petrol station in Rockhampton.
The court heard phone record checks revealed the number of the caller.
Ms Benson today said the pair would have to report regularly to police while on bail.
She also said they were not to have contact with each other or any witnesses.
One of the issues, Ms Benson took into consideration was that it was likely be a number of months before the matters would be dealt with by the higher court.
While she said it was her view a jail sentence was an option, it was not the magistrate court's role to determine sentencing.