A 20-year-old man, Thomas Stojanovski, is facing multiple charges in connection with an anti-Israel graffiti incident in Woollahra on November 21. During a recent NSW Supreme Court hearing, it was argued that Stojanovski was merely holding a phone to provide light while his accomplice spray-painted antisemitic slogans, rather than directly participating in the vandalism. He has been charged with 12 counts of property damage and one count of disguising his face to commit an indictable offence.
The hearing featured CCTV footage that depicted two individuals wearing hooded jumpers. The footage showed one spraying graffiti while the other illuminated the scene with a phone light. Notably, there was no evidence linking Stojanovski to the spray can; the court heard he was solely responsible for providing light for the alleged graffiti artist.
The duo are accused of vandalising nine vehicles and setting fire to one during their spree, inscribing slogans such as “f—Israel” and referencing the PKK, a group regarded as terrorist by both Turkish and Australian authorities. This attack occurred amid a concerning trend of antisemitic incidents in Sydney, including failed arson attempts and graffiti attacks on Jewish sites.
Stojanovski’s barrister, Peter Lange, contended that the prosecution’s case lacked strength. He emphasised the importance of evaluating each individual’s role in the act. Lange highlighted that a conviction was not a certainty and suggested that Stojanovski should not serve a lengthy time in custody—pointing out that without bail, he could spend a minimum of nine months in remand without access to rehabilitation programs afforded to convicted prisoners.
Justice Julia Lonergan mentioned that this length of time could be very challenging for a young person, indicating her contemplation over the appropriateness of denying bail. Stojanovski attended the hearing via video link from Parklea prison, displaying little emotional response. It was noted that while his accomplice showed ideological ties, such as Hezbollah tattoos, Stojanovski did not share similar motivations.
As the case unfolds, it raises significant questions about individual accountability and the broader impact of such hate-driven acts in a community already facing heightened tensions.