Aggravated robbery — doli incapax — Crimes Act 1961, s 22 — Oranga Tamariki Act 1989, ss 5, 272A & 333 — R v Kaukasi HC Auckland T014047, 9 August 2002 — R v NM [2016] NZYC 14 — R v JA2 — United Nations' Convention on the Rights of the Child. The child had been charged with one count of aggravated robbery. During the bail hearing, the Court was asked to address the issue of "doli incapax" — the principle that children under a certain age are "incapable of evil" and should therefore not be held criminally liable. The Court noted that the presumption under this principle can only be displaced where there is proof that the child knew the act or omission was wrong or that it was against the law. The Judge received information from a psychologist, the child's mother and a report writer. The combined weight of this information satisfied the Judge that the child knew the aggravated robbery was wrong, and the presumption of "doli incapax" was successfully rebutted. The child could therefore be charged with aggravated robbery. The child did not deny the charge and a family group conference was directed. Though there was a high risk of re-offending, the Judge recognised the irony that the child's risk profile made him ineligible for bail to a residential schooling facility. Bail to the child's home was granted, subject to conditions. Judgment date: 24 November 2021 * * * Note: names have been changed to comply with legal requirements. * **