The accused was remanded in prison after his ex-partner and two young daughters went to the police and made allegations of sexual abuse.
What is alleged to have occured?
His daughters made video recorded statements alleging offences carried out against them when they were 4 and 6 years old. The accused denied all allegations and was extremely distressed. A listed bail application had to be postponed when we were advised that a further video recorded statement had been made and one daughter now alleged that the accused had penetrated her vagina with a knife.
What happened at court?
Our client faced charges of:
Once we received a transcript of the videotaped statements we made an application for bail. Bail was opposed by the prosecution. Cross examination of the informant demonstrated that several aspects of the allegations were implausible and fantastical. There was no physical evidence to back up the claims and no corroboration by other witnesses who the complainants alleged were present during the sexual assaults. Cross examination revealed that witnesses had been contacted by police but their versions did not back those of the complainants. The accused was released on strict bail conditions.
What was the result?
Six (6) weeks later the defence were provided with statements from witnesses who did not back up the complainant. The second transcript of the videotaped statement revealed even more inconsistencies and implausible allegations. The prosecution decided that they could not succeed in their case and withdrew all charges.
All charges were withdrawn.
What is alleged to have occured?
His daughters made video recorded statements alleging offences carried out against them when they were 4 and 6 years old. The accused denied all allegations and was extremely distressed. A listed bail application had to be postponed when we were advised that a further video recorded statement had been made and one daughter now alleged that the accused had penetrated her vagina with a knife.
What happened at court?
Our client faced charges of:
- Incest
- Indecent Act with a Child Under 16
- Unlawful Assault
Once we received a transcript of the videotaped statements we made an application for bail. Bail was opposed by the prosecution. Cross examination of the informant demonstrated that several aspects of the allegations were implausible and fantastical. There was no physical evidence to back up the claims and no corroboration by other witnesses who the complainants alleged were present during the sexual assaults. Cross examination revealed that witnesses had been contacted by police but their versions did not back those of the complainants. The accused was released on strict bail conditions.
What was the result?
Six (6) weeks later the defence were provided with statements from witnesses who did not back up the complainant. The second transcript of the videotaped statement revealed even more inconsistencies and implausible allegations. The prosecution decided that they could not succeed in their case and withdrew all charges.
All charges were withdrawn.
Josh Taaffe
Josh has extensive experience in indictable crime including sex offences, assaults & drug matters.As an instructing solicitor Josh has specialised in handling complex matters, such as murder and terrorism trials, including State and Commonwealth Supreme Court trials. Josh is an Accredited Criminal Law Specialist.
View Josh Taaffe’s profile.
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 25/02/2013
