Doogue + George

Diversion for Sexual Assault

Diversion for Sexual Assault

Published · Updated

This is a case study on a sentence of diversion for Sexual Assault.
Our client was facing two charges of Sexual Assault when he approached our office for assistance. He had been out with a friend and misread signals following consumption of alcohol at dinner. He touched and kissed the complainant, and in circumstances where the complainant reported to the police that she did not consent.

Being a professional man, the client was very concerned for his future as a result of the charges being laid before the court. He was also concerned about the sex offender registration implications that may have followed had both charges proceeded.
 

Dee Giannopoulos represented the client at the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court.

We were able to successfully negotiate with the prosecution by being able to identify the deficiencies with the evidence. The prosecution conceded that only one charge ought to proceed. An application was then made for diversion.

There are many prosecutors who will not allow a recommendation for diversion when the charge is related to sexual assault. This is because of the internal matrix within Victoria Police which stipulates that it is a charge not appropriate for a diversionary outcome. However, this matrix does not take into account the individual circumstances for each case.

On this occasion, the prosecutor took into account the counselling that our client had been undertaking upon our advice, as well as the remorse he had shown. A recommendation for diversion was ultimately provided. The matter was put before a magistrate and we successfully advocated for a diversion for Sexual Assault. This means that (1) because it was a single charge, there was no need to advocate to avoid registration as a sex offender; and (2) our client has no disclosable record for this indiscretion in his life.

If the client had incurred a record or was placed on the register, his future employability would have been in significant jeopardy.
 

Dee Giannopoulosdee-giannopoulos-profile

Dee is based in our Melbourne office and appears at all Courts in Victoria. Dee’s commitment to her clients and her passion for justice drives her to achieve great results.

Visit Dee’s profile to read more about her 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 05/06/2018