Over the last few years, our client had engaged us on several occasions, each time charged with having breached the terms of a conduct agreement order (CAO). We had successfully defended or had charges discontinued each time and our goal was no different after we learned of the latest allegation by his former partner – that he had driven past her (and his young daughter) as she walked out of the local leisure centre. Once again, the complaint that the CAO was breached was weaponised in the Family Court to re-open proceedings in relation to parenting arrangements for his daughter, of which a decision was then pending. The former partner swore an affidavit in support of her Family Court application, which gave even more details of what allegedly occurred in the ‘drive-by’ 11 days earlier than the two statements she provided to police immediately following the event.
We filed an application in the Family Court to obtain permission to use that affidavit in the criminal trial, which was granted, over her objection, in our favour. The prosecution were not aware of the existence of this affidavit, which, when viewed together with the CCTV footage of the event, significantly impugned her credibility and supported our submission that even if the prosecution could prove it our client was driving the vehicle, it could not refute the possibility that the event had occurred by accident. Once again, the prosecution agreed with our assessment and sensibly decided to discontinue the charge, days out from the trial. Our application for costs was awarded in full.
