In this case study, we summarise our work for a client in a criminal law case where they were accused of common assault (domestic violence). The charges were dismissed on evidentiary grounds, reflective of our careful preparation in the lead up and diligence in seeking a just outcome for our client.
Birchgrove Legal recently represented a client who was charged with common assault (domestic violence) per section 61 of the Crimes Act 1900 and with an attempt to stalk, intimidate or intend fear of harm (domestic) pursuant to section 13(5) of the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007.
In cross-examination, the complainant was unable to indicate how she was assaulted, consistent with what she disclosed in her Domestic Violence Evidence in Chief (DVEC), and was forced to concede that if she had indicated to police that she been punched, it would have been a lie.
The defence opened its case by playing the ERISP in open court.
It was submitted that there was no prima facie case in relation to the assault charge on the basis that the complainant was unable to say how she was assaulted and that our client denied he uttered any threatening words.
His Honour dismissed the assault charges. He was not satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the complainant was assaulted, or that the mirrored wardrobe in question was damaged in the way the complainant alleged. He was also unconvinced that client had uttered any threat whatsoever.
Birchgrove Legal continues to achieve significant outcomes for our clients in a range of criminal law matters. If you are looking for an experienced, highly skilled and pragmatic legal team that defends client interests like their own, contact us today.