Case: Purchase of Mercedes Leads to Theft Charges.
Our client purchased an unregistered Mercedes in cash from a buyer advertising on the side of the road with a for sale sign. He contacted the seller and purchased the vehicle in cash, also obtaining a receipt. Police tied the car to an aggravated burglary and alleged that our client stole the vehicle.
Charges/ Ch1 (Theft of Motor Vehicle); Ch2 (Negligently Deal with Proceeds of Crime); Ch3 (Handling Stolen Goods)
Result/ Withdrawn: Ch1, 2: Plea Guilty: Ch3 (Handle Stolen Goods) adjourned undertaking without conviction and no loss of licence
Our lawyer provided an alibi for the theft charge that he was at home at the time. Our argument is that the police could not prove the element of dishonesty. Prosecution could not credibly provide a reason as to how they can prove the element but refused to withdraw because there are other family members with criminal histories for theft. This is an instance we come across frequently where police impugn guilt on clients because of other family members prior conduct. Our client instructed to ask for a sentencing indication as he’d been on bail for over a year and the magistrate conceded that our client was naive, young and accordingly provided a favourable sentence which he accepted. Notwithstanding our client had a strong case to contest the charges.