RESULTS

Recklessly Cause Injury & Unlawful Assault / Withdrawn

Case: Passive Person Charged with Assault.

After a night out with his mate, our client found himself in a strange situation. An altercation occurred between our client’s friend and his Uber driver, due to an argument about making a stop at McDonalds. Our client made attempts to diffuse the situation by restraining both parties in an attempt to break up the fight. The Uber driver chased our client and his friend with a rock and our client was later charged with assault related offences.

Charges/ Ch1 (Reckless Cause Injury); Ch2 (Unlawful Assault); Ch3 (Unlawful Assault by Kicking)

Result/ Withdrawal of all charges

We negotiated with Prosecutions over several months for a withdrawal of charges. The Prosecution initially refused to withdraw the charges because they believed they could obtain evidence from a third-party witness who observed the altercation. We had costs reserved after a Contest Mention, as the Prosecution wanted to obtain the witness statement. The Prosecution later offered to withdraw all charges without seeking costs, as they were unable to obtain the witness statement.

Drive In A Manner Causing Loss Of Traction / Withdrawn

Case: Police Mistaken Squealing Tyres For a Burnout.

Our client accelerated into a corner after the traffic light turned green. Police in a nearby police car heard a squealing noise and intercepted our client and impounded his vehicle for 30 days. Police told our client he did a burnout. Our client refuted that claim and said he had noisy tyres.

Charges/ Ch1 (Drive In A Manner Causing Loss Of Traction)

Result/ Withdrawal of charge

Police made no investigative effort in the incident. Our client immediately returned to the location of the alleged offence and took photos of the road which showed no skid marks. Further it is a defence to the charge if he did not intend to lose traction, which was clear on the evidence. Prosecution initially refused to withdraw the charge because they would have had to reimburse our client’s impound fee. We had costs reserved after the informant attempted to adjourn the contested hearing because he wanted to attend a music festival. Our client later offered to not seek his costs if the charge was withdrawn. We assume the informant got to the festival.

Contested Hearing / Charges Withdrawn by Prosecution

Case: Vigilante drill-wielding offender chosen by police as victim in bizarre assault case.

Our client attended a business with his father and brother to pick up his ute which had a toolbox fitted. There was a dispute as to the poor quality of the toolbox and our client went to park his ute outside the business premises to negotiate. The business ordered the employees to close the gates so that our client and his family could not leave. A worker armed with a drill entered our client’s ute assaulting him with it and smashing his infotainment system. Our client pushed the drill man out of his vehicle who then threatened our client’s family with the drill. Our client punched the drill man who then got up still waving the drill attempting to assault our client with it. Police charged our client as the offender.

Charges/ Ch1 (Recklessly Cause Injury); Ch2 (Assault)

Result/ Withdrawal of all charges at Contested Hearing

The incident was captured on CCTV which clearly showed the threat to our client and his family. Our lawyer put forward the position that our client acted in self-defence, defence of another, and defence of property. We also argued that by charging the drill man, police are encouraging vigilanteism. Prosecution refused to withdraw our client’s charges on the clear evidence that the drill man and employees of the business were the offenders. Our client elected to take the matter to a Contested Hearing. In the first 5 minutes the magistrate indicated without hearing any evidence that there will be difficulty finding our client guilty beyond reasonable doubt. This is because our client, his father and brother would give evidence against the drill man, and self-defence would likely be made out due to proportionality of drill vs fist.

Appeal To District Court / Full Acquittal

Case: Full acquittal of family violence charges on appeal to the District Court.

Our client is carer for her elderly mother. Another sibling (complainant) over the course of 20 years had engaged in conduct that saw her being leaseholder of the mother’s property. Our client attended the property with her mother looking for items that were put in the family tip – land that in the past, the complainant arranged to have transferred to herself at a time that her father, who was the title holder, was suffering dementia. On retrieving the items, the complainant intercepted our client and her mother leading to allegations of assault, criminal damage to a mobile phone and trespass.

Charges/ Ch1 (Trespass); Ch2 (Assault); Ch3 (Criminal Damage)

Result/ Full acquittal of all charges

At hearing in the local court, a magistrate dismissed the assault and trespass charges on the evidence of another witness present at the time and also found the complainant not to be credible. She found our client guilty of criminal damage to a mobile phone because our client admitted that she swiped the phone out of the complainant’s hand. Our client appealed in the district court on the basis that the extent of damage to the phone could not have been caused by our client as the phone landed on soft ground. The judge agreed and dismissed the remaining charge.

Handling Stolen Goods / Adjourned Undertaking Without Conviction

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.

Jaywalking / Withdrawn

Case: Man versus Car – Pedestrian Hit By Careless Driver Has Charge Withdrawn.

Our client was crossing an intersection in the evening. When halfway through the crossing a driver turned into the intersection and struck our client causing injuries. Instead of charging the driver, police charge our client with jaywalking. Later the driver sent our client a bill for damage to her car.

Charges/ Ch1 (jaywalking)

Result/ Charge withdrawn

The driver provided dash cam footage to police which we sought disclosure of. The footage showed our client clearly in the crossing with the driver not slowing at all and failed to drive with due care and attention. We drew this to the attention of the prosecution and questioned why the driver was not charged with careless driving. On consideration, the prosecution withdrew the charge. 

Recklessly Cause Injury & Drug Possession / Withdrawn

Case: Security guard charged for ejecting Drunk & violent Patron.

Our client was charged following ejection of a drunk patron at a nightclub who assaulted security staff and made threats to kill. The patron claimed that our client punched him 3 times and caused an injury to his nose. 

Charges/ Ch1(recklessly cause injury), Ch2(possess a drug of dependence)

Result/ All charges withdrawn

Our lawyer argued that our client acted in self-defence. We reviewed the CCTV footage that showed the patron assaulting other security guards which showed him walking into the tip of an umbrella held by another guard. It also showed that our client did not punch the patron 3 times as alleged. We argued that the injury was likely caused by the tip of the umbrella. Our client refused to plead guilty and took the matter to a contested hearing. Prior to the hearing date the prosecutor withdrew the charges. This is an example of the inequity of police charges where they pick and choose who to charge. Our client was happy with the result and could move on with his life, but could not work until his case was resolved due to his security licence being suspended. He intends on making a complaint against the patron.

Dealing with Proceeds of Crime / Withdrawn

Case: Proceeds of Crime Charges Withdrawn Against Partner of Suspect.

Our client is married to a person charged with drug trafficking and proceeds of crime charges. Police charged our client on the basis of money and property she had that they alleged were proceeds of crime.

Charges/ Ch1, 2, 3 (Knowingly Dealing with Proceeds of Crime); Ch4, 5, 6 (Recklessly Dealing with Proceeds of Crime); Ch7, 8, 9 (Dealing with Property Suspected to be Proceeds of Crime)

Result/ All Charges Withdrawn

Our view was that our client was charged to apply pressure on our client’s partner to plead guilty. We drafted an application for discontinuance on all charges on the basis that police could not prove that a) the goods and money were proceeds of crime and b) that our client either knew or was reckless to the fact that the property was proceeds of crime. A solicitor also attended our client’s police interview where they told her she was an “import” and had no clue what her husband was up to. This statement assisted our client’s case in establishing that she had no knowledge. We provided substantial material showing the provenance of the money in our client’s bank account and what she knew of her husband’s business and income earning activities at the time she moved in with him after they were married. Prosecution advised their intention to withdraw all charges.

Culpable Driving Negotiated to Careless Driving / $600 Fine Without Conviction

Case: False Statement By Traffic Controller Leads To Withdrawal of Culpable Driving Charges.

Our client was driving through a amber traffic light when he struck a cyclist who went through a red pedestrian crossing. The cyclist died and was found to have alcohol and drugs in his system. Police alleged that our client was speeding at over 80kmph in a 40kmph work zone. Our client denied there were any 40kph signs out. Despite police not doing their job and conducting a video walk through after the accident, they relied on a traffic controller statement that said the signs were put out and checked.

Charges/ Ch1 (Culpable Driving); Ch2 (Dangerous Driving Causing Death); Ch3 (Reckless Conduct Endangering Life); Ch4 (Reckless Conduct Endangering Serious Injury); Ch5 (Careless Driving)

Result/ Withdrawn: Ch1, 2, 3, 4

Plea Guilty: Ch5 (Careless Driving) $600 fine without conviction, no loss of licence

The prosecutor refused to believe that our client was telling the truth that no road works signs were out and despite police not having done their job. Our lawyer forensically reviewed all the CCTV footage available and found some footage that showed that there were no signs in place where the traffic management plan said they should be. The prosecutor still refused to withdraw the serious charges. We compelled the traffic controller to attend court and cross examine him on the signage. Our lawyer found more footage showing the workers putting the signs out after the accident occurred. The prosecutor had to concede that their witness had lied and agreed to resolve the case on careless driving. Our client is now considering a civil claim against the traffic control company.

Driving Whilst Disqualified / Withdrawn

Case: Client contests Driving Whilst Disqualified charge on Defence of honest reasonable belief.

Our client attended VicRoads to have his driver licence reissued after he was disqualified until he provided a medical report. He paid the fee and was told by the staff member that his licence will be updated on the day. Our client was intercepted by police the next morning at 2am and informed that he was disqualified from driving.

Charges/ Ch1 (driving whilst disqualified)

Result/ Charge Withdrawn

The prosecutor initially refused to withdraw the charge even though our client had the defence of honest and reasonable belief that he was licensed at the time of driving. We advised our client to take the matter to a Contested Hearing. Prior to the Hearing, a new prosecutor contacted our lawyer and offered to withdraw the charge.