Charged with Six Firearms Offences Whilst Serving an ICO; Minimal Aggregate Sentence Imposed

GC was charged with six firearms-related offences, namely ‘Possess unregistered firearm pistol’, contrary to s 36(1) Firearms Act 1996, ‘Not keep firearm safely not prohibited firearm/pistol’, contrary to s 39(1)(A) Firearms Act 1996, ‘Possess ammunition w/o holding licence/permit/authority’, contrary to s 65(3) Firearms Act 1996, ‘Acquire etc pistol subject to firearms prohibition order’, contrary to s 74(1) Firearms Act 1996, ‘Acquire etc ammunition subject to firearms prohibition order’, contrary to s 74(3) Firearms Act 1996 and ‘Firearm etc found at premises subject to prohibition order’, contrary to s 74(6) Firearms Act 1996. GC was serving an Intensive Corrections Order (ICO) for unrelated offences at the time of his arrest. He has a substantial criminal history including previous firearms charges.

Chris Cole entered negotiations with the Prosecution proposing a number of offences be withdrawn or placed on a Form 1, in exchange for a plea of guilty to the remaining offences. Ultimately, the Crown agreed to commit the matter for Sentence on just two offences, namely ‘Possess pistol subject to Firearms Prohibition Order’ and ‘Possess ammunition subject to Firearms Prohibition Order’. The sequence of ‘Not keep firearm safely’ was placed on a Form 1 and the remaining charges were withdrawn. GC was eligible for a 25% discount on Sentence for his early appropriate guilty plea (EAGP). 

Chris Cole briefed Counsel Mark Davies to appear at District Court Sentence. GC lives with severe cardiac illness and suffered a stroke not long before his arrest. A sentence bundle was prepared comprising of medical reports and documents, an affidavit, character references and other written materials in support of GC’s extenuating circumstances and mitigating factors.      

James Castillo appeared with Mark Davies of Counsel at District Court Sentence. The sentence bundle was tendered. Further tendered was an excerpt from the Bugmy Bar Book outlining the COVID-19 risks and impacts on prisoners. Counsel also prepared written submissions and made further oral submissions on GC’s behalf. GC was called to give evidence.

GC was then sentenced on the offences of ‘Possess pistol subject to Firearms Prohibition Order’, ‘Possess ammunition subject to Firearms Prohibition Order’ and ‘Not keep firearm safely’ (related offence). Ultimately, Her Honour found mitigating circumstances in GC’s favour and sentenced him to an aggregate sentence of 3 years with a non-parole period of 1 year and 8 months, backdated to include time already spent in custody.

This is an outstanding outcome for GC.

Sequence Placed on Form 1, No Conviction Recorded – Possess Prohibited Drug

AA was charged with one count of ‘Possess prohibited drug (Testosterone)’ and one count ‘Possess Prohibited drug (Methandienone)’, contrary to s 10(1) Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985.

Chris Cole acted for AA in his matter.

A plea of guilty was entered to both sequences in the Local Court and the matter was adjourned for Sentence. Chris indicated to the Court that Representations would be sent to the Local Area Command concerning the Facts and possibly placing one of the sequences on a Form 1.

Chris successfully negotiated to have the second sequence placed on a Form 1. The matter proceeded to Sentence.

The Prosecution tendered written materials. Chris then tendered an Affidavit sworn by AA, character references and a drug screen result.    

Ultimately, Her Honour Sentenced AA to a Conditional Release Order (CRO) without conviction for a period of 12 months. The only condition of that order is that AA is to be of good behaviour for the period of that order.

AA is required to have a clear criminal record for his employment. This is a great result for AA.

Aggregate Sentence on Lengthy List of Indictable Charges – Attempt Murder; Break & Enter

PB was charged with offences relating to series of break and enter incidents. Namely, 2 counts of ‘Aggravated break and enter and commit serious indictable offence’, contrary to s 112(2) Crimes Act 1900, ‘Attempt to murder’, contrary to s 18(1)(a) Crimes Act 1900, ‘Specially aggravated break and enter and commit serious indictable offence’ (inflict grievous bodily harm), contrary to s 112(3) Crimes Act 1900, 4 counts of ‘Deal with property proceeds of crime < $100000’, contrary to s 193C(2) Crimes Act 1900, 3 counts of ‘Break and Enter dwelling-house or building commit serious indictable offence’ (destroy etc property), contrary to s 112(1)(a) Crimes Act 1900, ‘Aggravated enter dwelling with intent’ (knowing people there), contrary to s 111(2) Crimes Act 1900, ‘Enter dwelling with intent’, contrary to s 111(1) Crimes Act 1900 and ‘Larceny’, contrary to s 117 Crimes Act 1900. These are very serious charges resulting in lengthy terms of imprisonment if sentenced at the top end. PB has a substantial criminal history and had previously spent a number of years in custody for similar offences.

Chris Cole and James Castillo acted for PB in these matters, instructing David Carroll as Counsel.  

Chris Cole entered negotiations with the Prosecution to amend the Agreed Facts. A number of the charges were Certified for District Court and remaining sequences were withdrawn.

Following further negotiations, the matter proceeded to Committal. Pleas of guilty were entered on PB’s behalf to ‘Specially aggravated break and enter and commit serious indictable offence, namely larceny in circumstances of special aggravation, namely, did intentionally inflict grievous bodily harm’, a rolled up sequence (inclusive of 3 sequences), ‘Deal with property proceeds of crime less than $1,000,000.00’, and ‘Break and enter dwelling house commit serious indictable offence’. Further sequences ‘Enter dwelling house with intent to commit larceny’ and ‘Larceny’ were placed on a Form 1. The matter then proceeded to Sentence.

James Castillo appeared with David Carroll for PB’s Sentence at the District Court. The Crown Sentence bundle was tendered, and the Crown made Sentence submissions regarding PB’s risk of re-offending, future dangerousness and the protection of the community. David Carroll then made submissions on PB’s behalf. Mr Carroll’s submissions addressed the timing of plea and utilitarian discount on sentence, the objective seriousness of the offences, the subjective circumstances and mitigating features and special circumstances, referring to materials in the Defence Sentence bundle.   

His Honour considered both Crown and Defence submissions then proceeded to Judgment. Ultimately, His Honour sentenced PB to an aggregate sentence of 10 years 6 months imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 7 years.

This is a very pleasing result for PB considering the objective seriousness of these offences and his prior criminal history.

CRO Without Conviction, Avoids Licence Suspension; Breach of Good Behaviour Licence

JP was charged with Drive across dividing lines to do a U-turn’, contrary to Road Rules 2014. When this incident occurred, JP was already on a good behaviour licence due to previous traffic offences. Chris Cole acted for JP in this matter.

 JP relies heavily on his licence as a Real Estate Agent. Having his licence suspended would significantly impact JP’s ability to work.

JP completed the Traffic Offenders Intervention Program (TOIP) prior to Sentence.

A plea of guilty was entered to the offence and the matter was listed for Sentence in the Local Court. Chris Tendered materials on JP’s behalf and made oral submissions that he ought not be convicted of the offence. Ultimately, the Presiding Magistrate agreed with the submissions and placed JP on a Conditional Release Order (CRO) without conviction, for a period of 12 months. JP is to be of good behaviour and not commit any further traffic offences during that period.   

This is a very pleasing outcome for JP.

No Conviction Recorded for Breach of Good Behaviour Licence

AT was charged with ‘Not stop at line at red light’, contrary to s 56(1)(a) Road Rules 2014. AT was on a good behaviour licence at the time of the offence. He elected to have the penalty decided in Court.  Chris Cole represented AT in his matter.

AT completed the Traffic Offenders Intervention Program (TOIP) prior to Sentence. He pleaded guilty to the offence and Chris tendered materials to the Court. The Magistrate noted AT’s plea of guilty and deemed it not expedient to record a conviction or record any punishment, pursuant to s 10(1)(a) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.  This means AT retains his licence and there is no breach of his good behaviour licence.

This is a great outcome for AT.

Plea Traversal Granted, Found Not Guilty; Supply Prohibited Drug

DJ was charged with ‘Supply prohibited drug >indictable & <commercial quantity’, namely Heroin, contrary to s 25(1) Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985. This offence carries a maximum penalty of 2 years imprisonment if prosecuted in the Local Court and 15 years imprisonment if prosecuted in the District Court. DJ has complex chronic health conditions that often render him in excruciating pain. He was receiving inpatient hospital treatment at the time of the offence.

DJ initially pleaded guilty to the offence. He did not fully understand the process or the nature of the charge he was pleading to. DJ sought new representation and made contact with O’Brien & Hudson Solicitors. Chris Cole acted in his matter moving forward.

Chris appeared at the Local Court where he lodged a Section 4 Application / Plea Traversal on DJ’s behalf. His Honour granted that application and a plea of not guilty was entered.

The matter proceeded to Hearing. Chris tendered written materials and made oral submissions on DJ’s behalf. DJ gave evidence and closing submissions were made by the Prosecution. The Magistrate then proceeded to Judgment, ultimately finding DJ not guilty of the offence.

This is an outstanding result for DJ.

Charged with 9 Counts ‘Break, Enter and Steal’ and 1 Count ‘Aggravated Break, Enter and Steal’, Minimal Aggregate Sentence Imposed

DK was charged with 9 counts of ‘Break, Enter and Steal’, contrary to s 112(A) Crimes Act 1900 and one count of ‘Aggravated Break, Enter and Steal’, contrary to s 112(2) Crimes Act 1900. The offences took place between 2013 – 2017.

An offence contrary to s 112(A) Crimes Act 1900 carries a maximum penalty of 14 years imprisonment. An offence contrary to s 112(2) Crimes Act 1900 carries a maximum penalty of 20 years imprisonment with a standard non-parole period of 5 years.  

Chris briefed Counsel Daniel Pace to appear in DK’s sentence proceedings. Chris Cole and Daniel Pace appeared with DK at the District Court for part-heard Sentence of all 10 offences. Subjective materials and written submissions were tendered on his behalf. After considering all evidence and submissions, His Honour ultimately imposed an aggregate sentence of 3 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 2 years, backdated to include time already spent in custody.

This is a great result for DK, particularly considering maximum terms of imprisonment for these offences. 

Significant Reduction in Sentence on District Court Severity Appeal; Dangerous Driving Occasioning Grievous Bodily Harm, Police Pursuit

JM was initially charged with a number of serious driving-related offences, namely, ‘Police pursuit- not stop- drive dangerously’, contrary to section 51B(1) Crimes Act 1900, ‘Exceed speed over 20km/h’, contrary to section 20 Road Rules 2014, ‘Dangerously driving occasioning grievous bodily harm’, contrary to section 52A(3)(c) Crimes Act 1900, ‘Negligent driving occasioning grievous bodily harm’, contrary to section 117(1)(b) Road Transport Act 2013, ‘Cause bodily harm by misconduct’, contrary to section 53 Crimes Act 1900, ‘Owner not disclose identity of driver or passenger’, contrary to section 17(1) Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 and ‘Not give particulars to police’, contrary to section 287(1) Road Rules 2014.

Pleas of guilty were entered to the charges of ‘Police pursuit- not stop- drive dangerously’, ‘Excess speed’, ‘Cause bodily harm, in charge of motor vehicle‘, and ‘Aggravated dangerous driving’. The remaining charges were withdrawn. JM was sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 3 years.

Chris Cole lodged a Severity Appeal in the District Court on JM’s behalf. An updated Sentence Assessment Report was ordered and the matter was adjourned for further Hearing and determination. The Severity Appeal was then listed for Judgment, on which occasion the Judge allowed the appeal, re-sentencing JM to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 2 years, 6 months with a non-parole period of 1 year 8 months.

This is a significant reduction in sentence and a very pleasing result for JM.    

Sentence of Imprisonment to be Served by Way of ICO; Deal with Proceeds of Crime

TL was charged with two counts of ‘Deal with property the Proceeds of Crime’, contrary to s 193C(1) Crimes Act 1900. The maximum sentence for this offence is a term of imprisonment of 5 years. Following his arrest Chris Cole made a successful Application for Grant of Bail. TL was immediately released from custody on bail. TL instructed Chris to enter pleas of guilty to both counts of ‘Deal with property the Proceeds of Crime’.

Chris briefed Counsel James Trevallion to act in TL’s sentence proceedings. A comprehensive sentence bundle of subjective materials was prepared and tendered, supplemented by oral submissions. The Magistrate considered submissions and ultimately sentenced TL to a term of 14 months imprisonment on the first count and 10 months imprisonment on the second count. His Honour ordered that assessment take place as to TL’s suitability to serve that sentence by way of an Intensive Corrections Order (ICO) with a Home Detention component. The matter was adjourned.

The matter then proceeded for part-heard Sentence where the His Honour found TL suitable to serve his sentence by way of an Intensive Corrections Order, with a Home Detention component. Ultimately, His Honour imposed both offences to be served concurrently, by way of ICO, Home Detention and a total of 100 hours community service.

This is a very pleasing result for TL.  

Successful Negotiations with Prosecution on Drug-Related Charges – CRO on Sentence

DS was charged with 11 drug-related and proceeds of crime offences, namely, ‘Deal with Proceeds of Crime < $1,000,000.00’, contrary to s 193(C) Crimes Act 1900, ‘Supply prohibited drug (Cannabis Leaf)’, contrary to s 25(1) Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985,  3 counts of ‘Possess/attempt to possess prescribed restricted - (Tramadol, Methylphenidate, Diazepam)’, contrary to s 10(1) Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 and 6 Counts of ‘Possess prohibited drug (Cannabis Leaf, Alprazolam, Oxycodone, Tramadol, Methylamphetamine)’, contrary to s 16(1) Poisons and Therapeutics Goods Act 1966.

Chris Cole submitted representations to the Local Area Commander. He noted an early plea of guilty to ‘Possess prohibited drug (Cannabis Leaf)’ and sought to withdraw the remaining charges. He further noted no evidence of drug supply, receipts corresponding to the small amount of cash found on the premises and prescriptions in DS’ name for Tramadol and Oxycodone. The remaining restricted medications were prescribed to acquaintances of DS, all having recently stayed in her home.

Following negotiations, the Prosecution ultimately agreed to Chris Cole’s offer, withdrawing a number of charges in exchange for a plea of guilty to ‘Possess prohibited drug (Cannabis)’, placing one count of each ‘Possess prescribed restricted substance’ and ‘Possess prohibited drug’ on a Form 1.  

The matter proceeded to Sentence.

Chris tendered written material and made oral submissions on DS’ behalf. Ultimately, His Honour sentenced DS to a Conditional Release Order (with conviction) for period of 12 months, the only condition imposed was to be of good behaviour for the duration of that order.

This is a great result for DS, particularly noting the objective seriousness of the initial charges.

Trial Withdrawn, Sentenced at Local Court Instead

JT was charged with a count of ‘Steal from person and inflict actual bodily harm’, contrary to section 95(1) of the Crimes Act 1900, which carries a maximum penalty of 20 years term of imprisonment. He was further charged with a back-up offence of ‘Receiving stolen property where stealing a serious indictable offence’, contrary to section 188(1) Crimes Act 1900, which carries a maximum penalty of 10 years term of imprisonment.

JT pleaded ‘not guilty’ to the single count on Indictment and his matter was listed for Trial at the Sydney District Court. Months prior to his Trial, the steal from person offence was formally withdrawn by the Crown and his matter was remitted back to the Central Local Court to deal with the back-up offence.

James Castillo acted for JT and entered a guilty plea to the back-up offence. James tendered a Sentence Assessment Report prepared for JT on his previous unrelated matter and made oral submissions on his behalf. Ultimately, the Sentencing Magistrate sentenced JT to a fixed term of 5 months imprisonment. JT’s sentence was backdated and from the Sentence date, he had only a month left to serve in custody before he was released.

This is particularly a great result for JT, noting his lengthy criminal history of the similar natured offences.

Breach of CCO, Similar CCO Imposed

KP pleaded guilty to the charge of ‘Assault occasioning actual bodily harm’, contrary to section 59(2) of the Crimes Act 1900. This offence carries a maximum penalty of 7 years imprisonment with no standard non-parole period. She also has a matter on a Form 1 which is a charge of ‘Larceny’, contrary to section 117 of the Crimes Act 1900, which carries a maximum penalty of 5 years.

Ultimately, His Honour imposed a Community Correction Order (CCO) for a period of 2 years with additional conditions namely, that KP participate in a treatment program at the direction of Community Corrections for alcohol and drug problems for the term of the order and that she remains at Healing House residential rehabilitation until the completion of the program.

KP breached her CCO when she was fined and convicted for possessing a prohibited drug. Her matter was called up by the same Judge who has sentenced her to CCO. James Castillo represented KP in her breach matter. His Honour adjourned the matter on numerous occasions to allow KP to get a bed placement at a residential rehabilitation, noting that KP’s options were limited, either to enter a residential rehabilitation program, or to be re-sentenced to a term of imprisonment. James referred and assisted KP to get an acceptance to a residential rehabilitation program to address her drug and mental health issues.

Upon acceptance to a residential rehabilitation, His Honour re-sentenced KP for the breach by revoking the CCO in place, and imposing a new CCO for 12 months with the additional conditions namely, that KP enter a detoxification program and upon completion, that she enters and remains at a residential rehabilitation until the completion of the program.

Sentenced to Four years out of a Maximum Life-time Imprisonment

MA was charged with an offence of ‘Manufacture prohibited drug > large commercial (4.82kg methylamphetamine)’, contrary to section 24(2) Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985. This offence carries a maximum penalty of life-time imprisonment with a standard non-parole period of 15 years and/or a fine of 5,000 penalty units (or $605,000.)

MA entered a guilty plea in the Local Court and he was committed for Sentence at the District Court. James Castillo represented MA in his matter, briefing Counsel Linda Barnes.

At Sentence, James and Linda tendered a psychological report on MA’s behalf. Linda further prepared written submissions supported by oral submissions in support of MA’s role in the offending.

Ultimately, His Honour sentenced MA to 4 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 2 years and 6 months.

MA was extremely happy about the outcome of his matter.

Not guilty of two counts of Common Assault

LD was charged with a count of ‘Excluded person re-enter licensed premises’, contrary to section 77 of the Liquor Act 2007, and two counts of ‘Common Assault’, contrary to section 61 of the Crimes Act 1900. LD entered a guilty plea on re-entering a licensed premises after being excluded and the remaining offences were defended.
Chris Cole acted for LD at his Hearing. The prosecution relied on the evidence provided by the complainants and a CCTV footage that captured the incident. Chris called LD to give evidence to establish self-defence. Submissions were then made by each of the Prosecution and Defence.

The Magistrate ultimately found LD, ‘not guilty’ of each of the offences of common assault and both offences were dismissed. With respect to LD’s guilty plea on re-entering a licensed premise after being excluded, the Magistrate fined him the sum of $1,100.00.

LD was very pleased with the outcome of his matter, noting that the maximum penalty for a common assault is 2 years imprisonment and the maximum fine for the other offence is $5,500.00

Successful Negotiation, Client escaped Imprisonment Sentence

OZ was charged with two counts of ‘Assault occasioning actual bodily harm’, contrary to section 59(1) of the Crimes Act 1900. Such offence carries a maximum penalty of 5 years imprisonment. OZ instructed Chris Cole to enter a guilty plea on one of the counts of Assault occasioning actual bodily harm and negotiate to reduce the charge of the other count.

Chris entered negotiations with the prosecution and successfully managed to reduce the offence of ‘Assault occasioning actual bodily harm’ to ‘Common Assault’ which only carries a maximum penalty of 2 years imprisonment. OZ then entered a guilty plea to the amended charge of Common Assault. The Facts were also varied to reflect the new charge.
OZ’s matter then proceeded to Sentence. Chris made submissions that imprisonment was not the appropriate penalty for OZ’s offences. The Sentencing Magistrate agreed and placed OZ on a Community Corrections Order for a period of 18 months with an additional condition that OZ complete the EQUIPS Domestic Violence Program.

This is an outstanding result for OZ, considering the objective seriousness of the offences.

Plea Offer Accepted

SA was charged with seven offences, namely, (1) ‘Menacing driving’, contrary to section 118(1) Road Transport Act 2013, (2) ‘Negligent driving’, contrary to section 117(1)(c) Road Transport Act 2013, (3)’Stop on path/strip’, contrary to section 197(1) Road Rules 2014, (4) ‘Not give particulars to other driver’, contrary to section 287(1) Road Rules 2014, (5) ‘Common Assault’, contrary to section 61 Crimes Act 1900, (6) Stalk/intimidate intend fear physical harm’, contrary to section 13(1) Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007, and (7) Use of offensive weapon with intent to commit indictable offence’, contrary to section 33b(1)(A) Crimes Act 1900.

SA sought Chris Cole’s legal advice and representation. Chris successfully negotiated a plea offer that SA would enter pleas of guilty to menacing driving, common assault and park on nature strip on the basis that the remaining offences were to be withdrawn.

At Sentence, Chris tendered various medical materials and made oral submissions, primarily focusing on SA’s mental state and nexus between his mental state and his offences. The Sentencing Magistrate accepted these materials and found that SA’s moral culpability was significantly reduced, due to his mental illness. The Magistrate placed SA on a Community Corrections Order for 6 months with respect to the common assault, and on another Community Corrections Order for 14 months with respect to menacing driving, which was to be served concurrently. The Magistrate convicted SA with no further penalty with respect to park on nature strip. The Magistrate also disqualified SA from driving only for a period of 12 months, that being the minimum period of disqualification for his offence.

This is a very pleasing result for SA as it allows him to comply with his medication regime.

No Complainant, AVO Withdrawn

A Provisional Apprehended Violence Order (AVO) was issued against TH in protection of his wife. TH retained Chris Cole to represent him in defending the AVO. The AVO Application was then listed for Hearing at Waverley Local Court.

On the Hearing day, the Court was made aware that the Officer in Charge was not notified of the Hearing date. Consequently, the person in need of protection (PINOP), the wife, was not subpoenaed. The Prosecution sought an adjournment to allow the PINOP to be subpoenaed. Chris opposed the adjournment application and made submissions as to why an adjournment should not be granted. The Magistrate agreed with Chris and refused the Prosecution’s application for the adjournment. Subsequently, the AVO Application was withdrawn and the matter was dismissed. 

From Aggravated Sexual Touching to Common Assault – No Conviction

US was charged with two sexual offences, namely, ‘Sexually touch another person without consent’, contrary to section 61KC(a) Crimes Act 1900, and ‘Intentionally sexually touch child 10 years or older and under 16 years’, contrary to section 66DB(a) Crimes Act 1900.

Prior to the Hearing commencing, Chris Cole entered a without prejudice discussion with the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) concerning possibly resolving the matter without needing to proceed to a defended Hearing. Chris successfully negotiated that both matters were to be withdrawn in exchange of a plea of guilty to a single count of ‘Common Assault’, contrary to section 61 Crimes Act. The Facts on Sentence were amended to reflect the amended offence.

At Sentence, Chris tendered various subjective materials and made oral submissions on behalf of US. Ultimately, the Sentencing Magistrate sentenced US to a Conditional Release Order, without conviction, for 2 years. A Final AVO was also issued.

This is an excellent result for US, particularly noting there is no conviction and the plea of guilty to the common assault charge does not attract registration on the Child Protection Register.

Only 2 Years Imprisonment for a Plea to Knowing Take Part in Supply of 1,130g Heroin

DW was charged with ‘Supply Large Commercial Quantity of Prohibited Drug (Heroin)’, contrary to section 25(2) Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985. The maximum penalty for this offence is ‘life’ imprisonment, with a standard non-parole period of 15 years and/or a fine of 5,000 penalty units (or $605,000.)

Upon negotiating with the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, Chris Cole succeeded in having the charge reduced to ‘Knowingly take part in the supply of large commercial quantity of prohibited drug (heroin)’, to appropriately reflect DW’s role in the offending. This offence carries the same maximum penalty.  

Chris briefed Counsel Nancy Mikhail to act for DW at his sentence proceedings at the District Court. A comprehensive sentence bundle of DW’s subjective materials was prepared and tendered at his proceedings, supplemented by oral submissions. Ultimately, DW was sentenced to 2 years imprisonment, comprising of a non-parole period of 15 months.

This is an outstanding outcome for DW, particularly noting the serious nature and maximum penalty of the offence.

Young Person found ‘Not Guilty’ of 7 Sexual Offences

AM, a young person, was charged with six counts of ‘Sexually touch another person with consent’, contrary to section 61KC(a) Crimes Act 1900, and a single count of ‘Aggravated sexual assault’, contrary to section 61J(1) Crimes Act 1900.

AM pleaded ‘not guilty’ to all charges and his matter proceeded to Hearing. Chris Cole represented AM at his Hearing which proceeded over four (4) days. The Prosecution called the complainant to give evidence as well as numerous prosecution witnesses, some of which were declared unfavourable witnesses. The defence called AM to give evidence as well as another civilian witness and various character referees.

The Magistrate provided a lengthy Judgment and ultimately found AM ‘not guilty’ of each count on the Indictment. Further, the Magistrate dismissed the Application for a Final Apprehended Violence Order for the protection of the complainant, noting Her Honour’s findings at the Hearing.

This is a huge relief for AM as his future was at stake. The maximum penalty for each offence of sexual touching is 5 years imprisonment. The maximum penalty for Aggravated sexual assault is 20 years imprisonment. A finding of guilt would have meant a default registration on the Child Protection Offender’s Register.