Drive Without Supervised Driver & Fail To Display L Plates / Withdrawn

Case: Charges Withdrawn On Lamborghini Identity Issue.

Our client was charged after he allegedly pulled up to a bowser at a service station in a white convertible Lamborghini. He filled up petrol, paid for the petrol and left the service station. He was then later charged with having no learner supervisor present and not displaing L-plates. Someone had reported the vehicle as suspicious and after police investigation, police charged our client.

Charges/ Ch1 (Driving Without Supervised Driver); Ch2 (Fail To Display L-Plates)

Result/ Withdrawal Of All Charges

We requested that the prosecution withdraw the charges at the earliest stage based on the fact that the photos of the accused person have characteristics of a middle aged man with a skin fade hair cut. Prosecutions agreed to withdraw the charges without our client seeking costs against them.

Carrying On An Illegal Tobacco Business / Fine With Conviction

Case: Jail Avoided for Carrying On An Illegal Tobacco Business.

Client was charged by police after raiding a gift shop and seizing over $100,000 worth of illegal tobacco and e-cigarettes. The client was working at the gift store and was charged with 4 charges in relation to the search warrant that was conducted. His charges related to the selling and posession of the tobacco and e-cigarettes and also failing to pay over $100,000 in tax.

Charges/ Ch1 (Carry On Illegal Tobacco Business and Avoiding Excise Duty); Ch2 (Possess Schedule 4 Poison); Ch3 (Supply Poison Without Authorisation); Ch4 (Carry on Tobacco Business Knowing Good Were Prohibited)

Result/ Withdraw Ch2, 3, 4; Plea Ch1:$2,000 fine with conviction

We negotiated with police prosecutions on multiple occasions and they agreed to withdraw 2 of the more serious charges involving the sale of the tobacco and e-cigarettes and avoiding excise duty (tax). We then subsequently had the summary of facts on the brief reduced by almost half.  This gave an opportunity for us to seek a sentence indication on the remaining charges.

Drive Whilst Suspended / Fine Without Conviction

Case: Rolled ankle leads to suspended driving charge.

Client was attending a wedding with his wife when she rolled her ankle and was unable to drive home after a night of celebratory dancing. Our client decided to drive home and was pulled over by police after they scanned his registration. Our client admitted to police that his Victorian drivers license was suspended.

Charges/ Ch1 (Drive Whilst Suspended)

Result/ Fine Without Conviction

We conducted a plea of guilty at the earliest stage to demonstrate remorse. Our client had no prior history of driving suspended which spared him a conviction for the charge.

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.