Obscene Exposure – Withdrawn
Our client was a 15-year old child who had never been in trouble before. He was charged with two charges of wilful and obscene exposure for exposing his genitals in two separate incidents. Our client exposed himself to two young girls at a park.
Josh Taaffe represented our client whose parents contacted Josh well before their son was even charged for the offences. He acted on his behalf at the Melbourne Children’s Court. Our client had admitted committing the offences. Josh arranged for our client to begin treatment with a forensic psychologist.
A few months later our client received his charges and had already engaged well with his treatment. The case was originally listed at the Moorabbin Children’s Court. Josh contacted the Police informant and the specialist Police Prosecutors who deal with sex offences at the Melbourne Courts. Josh was able to persuade police to allow the case to move to the specialist list at Melbourne.
As our client was over the age of 15, he could not be considered for a therapeutic treatment order. Josh discussed with Prosecutors the possibility of the sex list diversion treatment – an option that at the time was only available at Melbourne. All agreed that this was an appropriate case for treatment and diversion. Amongst the reasons were that treatment had already been commenced and that our client had also been a victim of someone exposing themselves to him.
Ultimately the case was adjourned while our client continued treatment with his forensic psychologist. At the completion of treatment, once a report was provided to police indicating a low risk of re-offending, all charges were withdrawn.
Our client, after his successful treatment, now has no records and can move on with his life.
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.
Visit Josh’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 25/02/2013