Criminal Damage x 10 – Diversion
The client is a senior public servant who was charged with having damaged train ticketing equipment to around $2500 worth of value.
He had been folding tickets up and putting them in the slot to stop the machines. He was caught after the Police had the station under surveillance and so was charged with Criminal Damage.
It was completely out of character and he is a very nice person who made a number of silly mistakes.
The matter went through the diversion stream and the Magistrate ultimately dismissed the charges. This meant that he does not even have a non-conviction listed against him. The reason that is important is that the Police policy (quite wrongly in our opinion) is to disclose non-convictions when record checks are done.
“But it is you Bill I wish to thank most of all. It was your professionalism and tenacity over these many months, which delivered the best possible outcome considering the situation I was in. You took a glimmer of hope and without making any rash promises, vigorously pursued the more difficult legal path, all the while treating me with respect and compassion. It was you, sir, whose determination and legal skills created the opportunity for me to live a normal existence again without any conviction or record against my name. As I told the magistrate – ‘I will not let you down!’”
Accredited Criminal Law Specialist for over 17 years and a criminal defence lawyer for over 25 years.
Bill specialises in defending corporate crime cases and defending serious sexual offences charges. Bill has expertly and successfully defended high profile, high-pressure cases and is highly respected by the Courts, police and his peers. Bill runs the Melbourne office and enjoys his involvement in advising on the higher level strategy that should be used to defend cases.
Visit Bill's Melbourne criminal lawyer profile to read more about his background and experience. You can also follow him on Twitter.
DISCLAIMER: This is a real case study of an actual case from our files. Details pertaining to the client have been changed to protect their privacy. The sentence imposed and the charge have not been altered. These case studies are published to demonstrate real outcomes and give an indication of possible tariffs in Court. We do not guarantee a similar case on these charges will get the same result. Please note that we post results at our discretion, therefore while many case studies are average results, others are notable for their exceptional outcomes. PUBLISHED 25/02/2013