Our client had attended a pub in Richmond with his friends. During the evening, members of our client’s group and other patrons began to get involved in some mutual exchanges of abuse. A fight broke occurred between one of our client’s friends and another male from the other group. In the aftermath of that fight, our client was charged with several assault-related offences:
Our client maintained in his record of interview that he was acting in defence of his friend and that the other party had initiated the assault. Certain acts attributed to our client (kicking and alleged choking) were at all times denied. At the contest mention, additional statements were requested from members of our client’s group who had also witnessed the incident.
Shaun Pascoe acted on our client's behalf at the Melbourne Magistrates' Court.
After a contest mention, in which additional statements largely supported our client’s
version of events (and were consistent with his police interview), the prosecution amended the prosecution summary. As a result, several aggravating facts were subsequently removed. Upon extensive negotiations with the police, our client was recommended for diversion.
After submissions to the Magistrate, our application for diversion was successful. Because our client ended up receiving a Court diversion, he avoided a disclosable court record which would have placed his continued employment in jeopardy.
He is an experienced criminal law solicitor and works hard to achieve the best possible outcomes for his clients. Shaun handles indictable and summary criminal offences and is an expert at criminal defence for both contested and non-contested cases.
Visit Shaun's profile to read more about his background and experience.
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 22/06/2015