We acted on the client’s behalf at the Heidelberg Magistrates’ Court
Our client had previously been granted diversion in 2011 for cultivating cannabis, and so the informant had initially said that he would not offer the client a second opportunity at diversion. However, we engaged in discussions with a police prosecutor who ultimately agreed to offer our client diversion. When the police agreed that diversion was appropriate, we still had to convince the magistrate. We filed written submissions in support of the diversion application and attached copies of medical material indicating that our client had been suffering from an acute stress disorder in the weeks preceding the assaults.
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 21/10/2015