‘Urine and milk’: Thug’s gross prison act

A man set to be deported after attacking another man in a “dangerous and callous” mugging that left the victim with part of his ear severed showed some disturbing behaviour while in prison, including a sick act involving urine and milk.

In court documents, Jok Gar is said to have “poured urine and milk” under another prisoner’s cell door, with the bizarre act captured on CCTV.

“A prisoner contacted staff in a heightened state,” the documents state.

“CCTV footage revealed that the applicant had poured urine and milk underneath the prisoner’s cell door.

“The applicant was placed on an intermediate regime.”
Mr Gar was jailed for two years on charges of robbery and recklessly causing injury after he and co-offender Tyler De Silva violently attacked a man on the streets of Melbourne on September 6, 2022.

During the attack, the man was slashed with a knife across his right cheek – severing part of his ear.

Court documents allege Mr Gar also “stomped” on another prisoner on September 14, 2023, and “verbally abused staff and spat on the floor” on December 19 and 22, 2022.

A judge described Gar’s attack as “seriously brutal, cowardly and unprovoked” after the victim was left unconscious on the ground by the pair, with the County Court of Victoria being told they also stole his phone.

De Silva received a lighter sentence – only a six-month jail term – due to being diagnosed with a moderate intellectual disability and a degenerative condition known as Tubular Sclerosis Complex (TSC), which caused behavioural difficulties and functional impairment.

The court was told he had an IQ of only 48, had been diagnosed with epilepsy and experienced “severe neglect issues” growing up.

Gar appealed his sentence, claiming the difference between his sentence and De Silva’s was “manifestly too large” and “gave rise to a justifiable sense of grievance”.

His legal team argued their roles in the attack were identical and said De Silva had a worse criminal history.

Mr Gar now faces deportation back to Egypt after losing a bid to appeal his sentence.

During their initial sentencing, the court was told the victim had been out drinking with friends on the morning of September 6 when he took a wrong turn, ending up on the corner of Spring St and Victoria Pde.

Gar and De Silva approached him, demanding his phone and wallet, before De Silva struck the man and caused him to fall.

Both Gar and De Silva then attacked the unconscious victim.

The man’s right earlobe was partially severed after he was slashed with a knife.

But prosecutors did not allege Gar used the knife, or was complicit in its use or knew it was present.

In his appeal Gar claimed the sentence was excessive due to his youth, limited criminal history and background of “instability and racial bullying”.

Gar – who was born to Sudanese parents in Egypt – also argued a different sentence should be imposed as he risked being deported due to his visa being cancelled.

He has no remaining family in Egypt, his counsel submitted.

“The applicant has no family or other supports in Egypt and does not speak Arabic,” a Supreme Court judgment states.

“His entire family is in Australia.

“As a result, it is submitted, the cancellation of his visa will make his time in prison more burdensome than it otherwise would have been.”

In their judgment, Supreme Court Justices Karin Emerton and David Beach dismissed Gar’s appeal.

They called his 2 year term “lenient” in the circumstances of what was a “dangerous and callous” robbery against a stranger.

The justices pointed to Gar’s history of violent behaviour, including assaults and verbal abuse of guards while in prison and attacks on other prisoners.

One incident in February last year involved Gar pouring milk and urine under a prisoner’s cell door.

“He has given no reason to believe that his prospects of rehabilitation are other than very poor,” the judgment states.

The justices said there was no good reason to reduce the sentence on the grounds of Gar’s visa cancellation.

“Tt is entirely unclear what the consequence of the visa cancellation will be,” they said.

“The applicant has been invited to apply to have the cancellation decision revoked.

“There are a number of steps available to the applicant before he faces any immediate threat of deportation.”