Diversion for Unlawful Assault With a Weapon, Threat Charges Withdrawn
This is a case study on a sentence of diversion for Unlawful Assault With a Weapon and withdrawal of threat charges.
Our client’s housemates called the police after he allegedly threatened to kill one of them. The police attended and found our client asleep in his bedroom, arrested him, and subsequently charged him with Threat to Kill, Threat to Inflict Serious Injury, Unlawful Assault With a Weapon, and Unlawful Assault.
The charges of Threat to Kill and Threat to Inflict Serious Criminal Injuries are considered to be serious criminal allegations and both offences carry maximum imprisonment terms of 10 and 5 years respectively. Our client was in his late thirties and had no previous court appearances. He was married and supported his wife and child through his income. He also held a responsible position with a major Victorian university.
The client did not agree with several aspects of the prosecution case. Of real concern for him was the possible adverse impact of a finding of guilt on his continued employment, even if made without conviction. As several aspects of the prosecution case were disputed by our client, his matter proceeded through the case conference and contest mention stages before being listed for a contested hearing.
Shaun Pascoe acted on the client’s behalf at the Heidelberg Magistrates’ Court.
On the day the case was to proceed as a contested hearing, the prosecution conceded the matters which were previously in dispute, and the serious indictable charges of Threat to Kill and Threat to Inflict Serious Injury were withdrawn. Ultimately our client received a diversion for Unlawful Assault With a Weapon.
This was an exceptional result for the client as he avoided a finding of guilt for an offence of violence. Consequently, he avoided a criminal record which would have been disastrous for his continued employment. The application for diversion was achieved by virtue of extensive prosecution in the days leading up to the contested hearing. The application was made more persuasive by reason of the impressive character references our client had obtained.
- The accused applied force to the complainant’s body;
- The application of force was intentional or reckless; and
- The application of force was without lawful justification or excuse.
Other related case studies:
- Recklessly Cause Injury and Unlawful Assault – Diversion
- Assault, Threats to Kill, Threats to Inflict Serious Injury – Diversion
- Diversion for Assault and Wilful Damage
- Withdrawing Assault and Threat to Kill Charges
- Criminal Damage and Unlawful Assault – Diversion
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 02/08/2019