Using Carriage Service to Harass – Adjourned Undertaking Without Conviction
This is a case of Stalking and Using Carriage Service to Harass resulting in an adjourned undertaking without conviction.
Following a separation, our client was charged with Stalking and Using a Carriage Service to Harass due to having been accused of sending more than 80 text messages and numerous phone calls to the ex-partner over a period of few days. The contents of the text messages varied, but included some violent messages directed towards the ex-partner.
Sophie Stafford represented the client at the Broadmeadows Magistrates’ Court.
We successfully argued that the charge of Stalking was not made out at law, as there was no extended course of conduct despite the messages and calls occurring over a number of days. This resulted in the withdrawal of the Stalking charge by the prosecution.
The matter proceeded to a contest mention and we sought a sentencing indication on the single charge of Using a Carriage Service to Harass. We made submissions to the court revolving around the client’s personal circumstances, the nature of the text messages, and the fact that they had to be viewed from within the context of a very difficult relationship breakdown.
After hearing the submissions, the magistrate was convinced and sentenced our client for the charge of Using a Carriage Service to Harass to an adjourned undertaking without conviction, with the condition to be of good behaviour for a period of 6 months. This condition was eventually complied with and the charge was ultimately dismissed in the client’s absence.
Sophie's attention to detail plays a big part in obtaining successful results for clients. She handles both summary and indictable charges at Melbourne and suburban courts.
Know more about Sophie's expertise by checking out her profile page here.
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 10/04/2017