Unlawful Assault and Threat to Kill – Accused with Mental Illness

AssaultThis is a case of Unlawful Assault and Threat to Kill involving an accused with a mental illness.

Our client was charged with Threat to Kill, Threat to Inflict Serious Injury, Possess Dangerous Article, and Unlawful assault. The facts concerned our client calling the police and making several threats to a police officer that he intended to harm his father. He called the police and actually attended the police station intending to confront his father at the said venue. He was found to be in an emotional and agitated state and was arrested and conveyed to a hospital for a mental health assessment. He was 39 years old at the time.

The father made a statement to the police wherein he described that he had been assaulted by our client in the weeks preceding the offence. Our client had a long history of mental illness but did not have a significant criminal history. He had a prior 7 years ago for a motor vehicle offence.

It must be noted that our client was generally cooperative with the police. The complainant, the client’s father, made it clear in his statement that he did not desire for his son be charged, but did want the protection of an intervention order. Our client consented to an intervention order brought by the police against him on behalf of his father. At the time of the court hearing, the client has committed no breaches of the intervention order.

Shaun Pascoe represented the client at the Ringwood Magistrates’ Court. The charges were:

Although our client’s father preferred that the prosecution discontinue prosecuting, the prosecution could not withdraw the charges based on independent evidence that in their view supported the charges.

The case proceeded as a case conference on the first mention date, and our client’s father attended to support his son. The prosecution was invited to speak to our client’s father to confirm his attitude to the continuation of the prosecution. They had a conference with our client’s father and were able to obtain a better understanding of the marked improvement in the family home environment since the date of the offending.

Further discussions with the prosecutor then occurred, and the possibility of the matter resulting in a diversion was canvassed.

For several reasons, the prosecution supported the matter being diverted, and accordingly our client received a diversion – with a condition that he continue to receive treatment for his mental illness and to comply with the current conditions of the Intervention Order.

This was a pleasing outcome for a case of Unlawful Assault and Threat to Kill involving an accused with a mental illness, especially as our client had taken significant steps to obtain employment. A finding of guilty for any of the offences he faced would have made the prospect of finding employment much harder.

 


Shaun PascoeShaun Pascoe

Shaun is an Accredited Criminal Law Specialist and a partner of the firm. Shaun runs the Heidelberg branch of Doogue + George.

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 04/12/2017