Doogue + George

Domestic Violence – Charges Withdrawn

Published · Updated

This case involved a verbal and physical altercation between a husband and a wife. There was also a mutual FVPO (intervention orders) in place at the time.
The husband, our client, was accused of physically assaulting his wife (recklessly causing injury) that caused multiple bruises to her eye, torso, legs, and also breaking her phone. He indicated that she was the aggressor. She had been drinking and baiting him in order to get him to breach his order so she could use this against him in pending family court proceedings. As a result, our client called over a neighbour until his family could come to be witnesses if she was to allege anything against him. He didn’t leave the premises because their two young children (toddler and baby) were sleeping upstairs and she was roaringly drunk. He didn’t trust that she would be sober enough to assist them when they woke up form their afternoon nap. She attacked him and jumped on his back and, in an attempt to get her off, he shrugged her off and she fell onto trampoline barrier. Our client admitted to grabbing her phone and putting it into water when she was using it to send him insulting texts from the other room.
 

Our client faced the Sunshine Magistrates’ Court with us acting on his behalf. The charges were:

We were able to make the police obtain a statement from the neighbour who was independent but who was able to confirm that he was called over. He was very uncomfortable but he witnessed our client’s wife being drunk, insulting our client, and being generally provocative and aggressive, laughing at our client and calling him a wuss for needing to call over the neighbour.

We also spoke to our client’s father who told us that he also surreptitiously took photographs of her when she was hitting our client before going to his aid and calling the police. We were able to present this evidence to the prosecution to paint a picture of the reverse of the stereotypical scenario of domestic violence where the male is the aggressor and the female the vulnerable victim. Our client had been the victim of ongoing violence against him by his partner but was too ashamed to admit it.

All charges against our client were withdrawn save for damaging his wife’s phone during the currency of a FVPO. His wife was charged with assaulting him and breaching the FVPO against her. Our client ultimately received an adjourned undertaking to be of good behaviour, without conviction, for the sole offence of damaging his wife’s phone. Had he not have been believed about the factual circumstances, he would be looking at serious penalties imposed for family violence including lengthy community corrections orders, a conviction, and a mandatory men’s behavioural change program.
 
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 29/10/2015