At ED Legal, we recently secured an important victory for our client, who was found not guilty of assault occasioning actual bodily harm and intimidation following a contested two-day hearing in Burwood Local Court.
The charges stemmed from an alleged incident on the evening of 9 February 2024, in which it was claimed that our client had attended the complainant’s home and, during an argument, physically assaulted her. Specifically, police alleged that our client had grabbed the complainant by the hair, punched her with a closed fist, and pressed her face against a brick wall, causing visible bruising to her face. It was further alleged that he threatened the complainant, stating that if she told anyone, he would arrange for someone to come after her.
The case presented significant challenges, given the seriousness of the allegations and the concurrent injuries consistent with the allegations against the accused. During the hearing, the court heard evidence from the complainant, a police officer, and a civilian witness. The complainant had provided three separate statements to police outlining what she claimed had occurred. Each statement contained critical differences in the way the events were described.
Our approach to the defence focused on a meticulous examination of the evidence, including each of the complainant’s statements. During cross-examination, we were able to highlight numerous inconsistencies between the versions of events provided by the complainant. These inconsistencies were particularly notable in relation to how the assault allegedly occurred, as well as in her descriptions of the threats said to constitute intimidation.
Additionally, the notes made by the officer in charge of the investigation played a crucial role in undermining the prosecution’s case. The officer’s contemporaneous notebook entries, which recorded comments made by the complainant during their initial discussions, revealed important contradictions when compared with her formal statements. These inconsistencies raised questions about the reliability and accuracy of her account.
Ultimately, the discrepancies in the evidence were significant enough to raise reasonable doubt in the mind of the Magistrate. As a result, the court found our client not guilty of all charges.
This case highlights the importance of thorough and strategic defence work in criminal matters. By carefully analysing each piece of evidence, including witness statements, police notes, and inconsistencies in evidence, we were able to dismantle the prosecution’s case and secure the right result for our client.
At ED Legal, we are committed to providing fearless and precise legal representation to clients facing criminal charges. If you or someone you know is accused of a serious offence, it’s crucial to seek advice from experienced criminal defence lawyers who know how to challenge the evidence effectively and protect your rights in court.
Contact us today for a confidential discussion about how we can help.
