Indecent Act With Child Under 16 and Indecent Assault – Withdrawn
Our 17-year old client was charged with Indecent Act With a Child Under 16 for having allegedly masturbated with a 14-year old boy, and Indecent Assault for allegedly throwing a semen-covered tissue onto the 14-year old boy.
The background of this case was that there was a church camp and our client was in attendance along with many other boys and girls from the local community. He shared a dorm with 5 other boys. On the first night of the church camp, after all others had gone to bed, the 6 boys stayed up watching movies on their iPads. Our client decided to look up some pornography and it was alleged that he forced the other younger boys being 15, 14 and 13 years of age to watch the pornography.
It was alleged that he masturbated in front of the youths and ordered one of them to fetch him some toilet tissue. He then allegedly used the toilet tissue to clean himself up and threw it onto the face of the 14-year old who was lying on his sleeping back next to our client.
Our client faced the Melbourne Children’s Court and Dee Giannopoulos acted on his behalf.
Our client instructed us that the semen on the toilet tissue did not belong to him. We advised our client to provide his DNA to the police. The toilet tissue was tested and it was confirmed that it was not our client’s DNA and that the charge could not be proven by the prosecution.
We sent our client to undertake counselling specific in the area of sexual offending for youth. He engaged well in this counselling and a report was provided to the court and prosecution. The prosecution was then persuaded to withdraw both charges against our client so that he did not have a criminal record that would affect him for his adult life.
Dee is based in our Melbourne office and appears at all Courts in Victoria. Dee’s commitment to her clients and her passion for justice drives her to achieve great results.
Visit Dee’s profile to read more about her 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 16/05/2016