Diversion for Theft of Motor Vehicle
This is a case that involves an application for diversion for Theft of Motor Vehicle.
Our client was one of several accused who allegedly participated in taking a car and then driving it from a secure car park. She was 19 years old at the time of the alleged offending and had no prior court appearances in the Magistrates’ Court jurisdiction. The car was not damaged. When interviewed, our client made a comprehensive comment interview in which she expressed her genuine remorse for her actions, and gave a complete account of her actions and that of her co-accused.
Shaun Pascoe acted on the client’s behalf at the Heidelberg Magistrates’ Court on the following charges:
Because our client was very remorseful and made early and full admissions, an application for diversion was suggested during the case conferencing process. Her high level of co-operation and, critically, her age (19) at the time of the offence, prompted the prosecution to agree to recommend our client for a diversion.
It must be noted that the client made full restitution prior to the diversion assessment.
During the diversion hearing, impressive material in mitigation was tendered to the court, including character references and a psychological report. Our client’s obvious remorse was demonstrated through her letter of apology to the victim, which was filed before her diversion application was finalised.
In this somewhat exceptional case, the prosecution was content to recommend diversion. The court was also prepared to grant diversion due to the very good material that was placed before it. Accordingly our client avoided a disclosable outcome for a charge of Theft of Motor Vehicle.
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 12/01/2018