Recklessly Causing Injury and Unlawful Assault – No Conviction

This is a case study on charges of Recklessly Causing Injury and Unlawful Assault in the context of family violence. The Recklessly Causing Injury charge ultimately got withdrawn and the Unlawful Assault charge resulted in an adjourned undertaking without conviction.

What is alleged to have occurred?

Our client faced a challenging legal situation following a brief physical altercation with their stepson, which left bruising on the stepson’s neck. The incident led to police involvement and our client’s subsequent arrest. Charges of Recklessly Causing Injury and Unlawful Assault were made which are both serious offences with significant potential consequences.

Upon reviewing the case, we identified critical weaknesses in the prosecution’s evidence. Specifically, we examined the medical evidence and argued that the bruising on the stepson’s neck did not meet the legal definition of “injury” under the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic). Medical expert evidence supported this assertion, highlighting that bruising alone was insufficient to substantiate the injury charge.

We engaged in case conference with the prosecution and presented a detailed submission requesting the withdrawal of the Recklessly Causing Injury charge. After considering the evidence, the prosecution agreed to drop this charge. Consequently, our client pleaded guilty to the lesser charge of Unlawful Assault, which carries a significantly reduced maximum penalty.

To achieve the best possible outcome for our client, we undertook meticulous preparation for the plea hearing. This included obtaining extensive personal details about our client and the circumstances surrounding the incident. Key factors included:

• the client’s migration to Australia;
• their role as a single parent to two children;
• Significant pressures in both their professional and personal life at the time of the offence;
• their previously unblemished criminal record.

Additionally, we gathered evidence regarding the client’s post-incident hospitalisation due to a functional neurological disorder, which was linked to the stress caused by the event. This medical documentation allowed us to frame the offence in the broader context of the client’s mental health and personal hardships.

What happened during the County Court trial?

At the plea hearing, we presented compelling arguments emphasising our client’s:

1. Good Character: Highlighting the client’s clean record and their longstanding contribution to their family and community.
2. Personal Hardships: Including the separation from their wife after 16 years of marriage and the client’s subsequent hospitalisation.
3. Rehabilitation Efforts: Demonstrating the client’s commitment to addressing the underlying issues that contributed to the incident.
4. Strong Community Supports: We obtained character references from a number of our client’s colleagues and friends substantiating their good character and highlighting the support that they had in the community.

We urged the Magistrate to impose an adjourned undertaking without conviction, a sentence that would allow our client to avoid the lifelong implications of a criminal record.

What was the result?

The Magistrate accepted our submissions, sentencing our client to a 12-month adjourned undertaking without conviction. This outcome ensured that our client would not need to disclose this matter to their employer—a critical factor given the nature of their profession.

This case underscores the importance of strategic legal advocacy and thorough preparation. By identifying key weaknesses in the prosecution’s case and presenting a well-rounded plea, we achieved an exceptional result for our client, safeguarding their future and professional reputation.

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 06/12/2024