Recent Cases

September, 2026

Blind spot steers into a tight spot

Motorbike Police Pursuit Charges Reduced Before Trial

Published September 2026

A young motorbike rider was due to stand trial on eight charges arising from a police pursuit.

Our young client was due to stand trial on 8 charges arising from a lights and sirens police pursuit of his motorbike for a significant distance, including along a footpath. When caught, a search of his backpack uncovered an assortment of drugs, knuckledusters and a smoking pipe. The motorbike had no license plates and our client did not hold a license to ride it.

We reviewed the evidence and provided the prosecution with a proposal, pointing to the weaknesses in establishing guilt on 3 of the 8 charges. There was no evidence of when, where and which police office located two of the drug varieties or the knuckledusters in circumstances where our client did not admit he was aware of their presence in the backpack. As to the aggravated dangerous driving charge and failing to stop, the issue was whether the prosecution could prove that our client knew he was being pursued and intended to evade police. Despite body-worn camera footage showing our client turning his head, it could not show why he turned his head or he had actually seen the police lights or heard the sirens in circumstances where he was wearing a helmet and goggles. The prosecution agreed with our assessment.

On the morning of his trial, 3 charges were discontinued and our client pleaded guilty to 3 of the previously admitted charges and downgraded charges of dangerous driving and failing to stop.

Our client received a significant reduction for his pleas of guilty, and in combination with clean record, youth, co-operation with police, impulsivity and remorse, was sentenced to fines, a license disqualification and … awarded costs as a consequence of the 3 charges being discontinued and the downgraded of 2 aggravated charges.

September, 2026

False Cover, Real Prison, Swift Release

Fraud charges, restitution and suspended imprisonment on appeal

Published September 2026

A serious prosecution arose from a construction business operated with her former partner. The allegations concerned fraudulent home indemnity insurance documents, payments received by the business and misuse of confidential information held by her employer.

The prosecution developed from a joint indictment containing 14 counts to one containing 46 counts, 32 counts of which named our client. When Perrella Legal took over her defence, we reviewed the extensive evidence and assessed the strength of the case charge by charge. We advised her to seek a negotiated resolution, which was successful.

The original indictment was discontinued, and our client pleaded guilty to eight offences on a new indictment. The resolution avoided a lengthy trial and brought numerous separate allegations together in charges that reflected the conduct for which she accepted responsibility.

We also gave our client frank advice about sentencing. The offences were serious, particularly concerning breaching her employer’s trust. We told her that immediate prison was likely unless we could build a compelling, evidence-based case for suspending the sentence.

The foundation for achieving that goal would take time.

We arranged an assessment by a forensic psychologist and connected her with a clinical psychologist for treatment. Their reports examined the grief and psychological vulnerability that had preceded her relationship with a controlling and manipulative partner. They also addressed her insight, progress in treatment and low risk of reoffending.

We advised our client to make restitution and worked with a commercial lawyer to achieve it. We sought time for her to sell real estate so that she could repay losses associated with the fraud offences. She ultimately made significant funds available for full restitution. We also obtained evidence of the fine she had already paid following related State Administrative Tribunal proceedings.

Our client had made significant admissions to investigators. On our advice, she provided a detailed statement about her own offending and her former partner’s involvement and undertook to give evidence against him if required. We brought her cooperation, guilty pleas, restitution, treatment and personal circumstances together in 16 pages of written sentencing submissions arguing for a suspended sentence. We also persuaded the sentencing judge to impose no penalty for one of the fraud counts.

Despite that preparation, the District Court sentenced our client to three years and 10 months’ immediate imprisonment.

We scrutinised the sentencing decision and identified factual errors that had made her offending appear more serious. The judge had attributed losses to her that arose from problems with the building work. The judge had also treated her as though she had offended knowing the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, although the relevant conduct occurred before the pandemic was declared and had nothing to do with the quality of the building work.

Given our intimate involvement in the matter at sentencing, we instructed an independent, reputable and highly experienced criminal law barrister to run the appeal. Our detailed sentencing material remained central to the argument that imprisonment should be suspended. Before the hearing, the State conceded in its appeal response that the factual errors were material and that our client should receive a lesser sentence. The Court of Appeal still had to decide whether she should remain in prison.

We applied for an urgent hearing, which was heard two days later.

The Court unanimously allowed the appeal. It found that the sentencing judge had failed to properly consider suspension and that the sentence was plainly unjust in the circumstances. It recognised our client’s psychological vulnerability, cooperation, restitution and genuine remorse. It also considered the disparity between her sentence and the suspended sentence imposed on her former partner, whom it regarded as the principal offender.

After approximately three months in prison, our client walked out of the Supreme Court doors with a sentence she could serve in the community: two years’ imprisonment suspended for 12 months.

September, 2026

Stunts can turn into growth

Reckless driving and unlawful database access offences resolved without immediate imprisonment

Published September 2026

A junior law-enforcement employee facing an extraordinary combination of workplace misconduct and serious driving offences avoided immediate imprisonment after the Court accepted that punishment could be achieved without sending him to prison.

Our client had improperly accessed information held on a government database on nearly a dozen occasions. Outside work, his enthusiasm for speed and motorcycle stunts created an even larger problem. Riding a modified motorbike, he accumulated 27 reckless driving charges together with numerous charges of driving without authority.

By the time the matter came before the Court, the sheer number and seriousness of the offences placed him in a precarious position.

The reality of what he was facing became even clearer when a co-accused, whose offending was significantly less serious in both nature and quantity, narrowly avoided immediate imprisonment. Understandably, our client feared that a prison sentence was inevitable.

From the outset, we considered that the sentencing exercise would require far more than simply asking the Court for leniency. The volume of offending meant that the prosecution would inevitably place significant emphasis on punishment, deterrence and the seriousness of the overall course of conduct.

Our approach was therefore to prepare a carefully structured sentencing case well in advance of the hearing. Detailed written submissions were filed with the Court together with supporting material addressing our client’s personal circumstances, development, acceptance of responsibility and prospects of rehabilitation. The aim was to ensure that the sentencing magistrate had a complete picture of the person behind the charges, rather than being left to view the case only through the number and gravity of the offences.

A central theme in the submissions was our client’s youth at the time of the offending.

Youth is not a complete answer to serious criminal conduct, nor does it excuse repeated poor decisions. However, it can be an important sentencing consideration where immaturity, impulsivity and an underdeveloped appreciation of consequences have contributed to the offending behaviour. We sought to explain that connection carefully. The defence case was not that our client should escape punishment because he was young. Rather, we submitted that his age and immaturity helped explain how a series of reckless and impulsive decisions had escalated into such a serious accumulation of offending. At the same time, we placed before the Court material demonstrating that he had accepted responsibility for his conduct and had strong prospects of moving forward without reoffending.

Those considerations were particularly important because the prosecution advanced strongly adverse submissions about our client and his character.
The sentencing hearing extended for several hours. During the hearing, our counsel developed the arguments set out in the written submissions, addressed the seriousness of the offences and responded to the prosecution’s characterisation of our client.

The defence maintained that, notwithstanding the number of charges and the gravity of some of the conduct, immediate imprisonment was not the only appropriate sentencing option. We submitted that the Court could impose a sentence which properly reflected punishment and deterrence while still recognising our client’s youth, rehabilitation and future prospects. That argument carried obvious significance for a young man who had spent the lead-up to sentencing expecting that he might leave court in custody. Ultimately, the Court agreed that immediate imprisonment was not required.

Despite facing nearly a dozen offences involving improper access to a government database, 27 reckless driving charges and numerous charges of driving without authority, our client avoided being sent directly to prison.

The result demonstrated the importance of careful sentencing preparation, particularly in matters where the number of charges can easily overshadow the personal factors relevant to sentence. It also showed that rehabilitation is not simply a matter of saying that a person has learned from their mistakes. Where serious offending is involved, the Court must be given a proper evidentiary and legal basis for concluding that the person before it has genuinely developed, accepted responsibility and has realistic prospects of avoiding further offending.

For our client, what began as a series of reckless decisions ultimately became a lesson in consequences, responsibility and growth.

September, 2026

Avoidable Ahoy

Twelve-year-old Leederville assault charge discontinued after serious flaws emerged in the prosecution’s identification evidence

Published September 2026

For more than a decade, an unresolved assault charge had followed our client around the world. By the time he contacted us from overseas, he had built a new life, started a family and established himself in another country. But one problem remained unresolved in Western Australia: an old assault charge, an outstanding arrest warrant and the prospect of returning to Perth to face a trial over an allegation said to have occurred about 12 years earlier.

The prosecution alleged that our client had punched another man once to the jaw on the dancefloor of a Leederville nightclub. He had been arrested outside the venue shortly afterwards. At the police station, officers photographed his hands and noted what appeared to be blood on his knuckles, but no swabs were taken to determine whose blood it was.

Police also interviewed him in the early hours of the morning while he was still affected by alcohol and pain medication. He appeared visibly impaired and had suffered an injury to his hand, which he explained had occurred while doing ‘front rolls’ on the dancefloor. After reviewing the circumstances in which the interview was conducted, we considered there were strong grounds to argue that it should not be admitted into evidence at trial.

The more fundamental issue, however, was identification. Two witness statements taken relatively soon after the incident gave differing descriptions of the alleged offender. The nightclub CCTV was poor quality and, remarkably, was not provided to police until about four years later. Two further witness statements were obtained years after the alleged incident, but did little to overcome the underlying weakness in the prosecution case. Nor had the blood seen on our client’s hands ever been forensically tested.

By the time police charged our client, about five months after the alleged assault, he had already returned overseas, where he had been living and working for several years. A summons was sent to his former Western Australian address without his knowledge. When he did not appear, an arrest warrant was issued. He only discovered the warrant later while applying for a visa to another country.

Our client later returned to Western Australia and obtained advice from another lawyer, but did not have confidence that the case could be successfully defended and left again before the trial date. Years later, when he approached us, he wanted to return to Perth and finally put the matter behind him. After reviewing the evidence, we reached a different view: the prosecution faced a serious obstacle in proving beyond reasonable doubt that our client was the person who threw the punch.

We prepared a detailed written submission identifying the evidentiary weaknesses and urging the prosecution to discontinue the assault charge. The submission was rejected. Relying on our advice that he had strong prospects of successfully defending the allegation, our client nevertheless returned to Western Australia. We arranged for his arrest at Perth Airport and successfully secured bail on his behalf.

We continued pressing the prosecution to reconsider. Our written submission was provided again before the matter was listed for a two-day trial and again as trial preparation progressed. Each time, the request to discontinue was rejected.

One day before the trial was due to begin, the prosecution finally changed course. The State accepted that there was no reasonable prospect of conviction and discontinued the assault charge.

Two court days had been set aside for the trial. Following the discontinuance, we applied for costs on our client’s behalf and the Magistrate granted the application in full. The separate matter arising from our client’s earlier failure to appear was resolved with a $100 fine.

After years of uncertainty, our client was able to leave court without an assault conviction, without facing a trial on the 12-year-old allegation, and with his defence costs awarded in full.

August, 2026

A taxing ordeal

Taxi driver avoids immediate imprisonment after sentencing for grievous bodily harm

Published August 2026

A routine taxi fare became a serious criminal case carrying a real risk of imprisonment after two intoxicated passengers refused to pay and an attempt to stop one of them leaving the vehicle ended in a significant head injury.

Our client was a hard-working migrant taxi driver in his early 30s who had come to Australia to build a better life for his family. At the time of the incident, he was working multiple jobs to support his wife and two young children. He had no prior criminal history and had never before found himself facing the prospect of imprisonment.

The incident began late at night when two heavily intoxicated male passengers refused to pay their taxi fare. Our client told them that he would call police if necessary. When one of the men attempted to leave the vehicle, our client grabbed hold of his shorts in an effort to prevent him from leaving before police could be contacted.

At that point, the passenger was positioned partly inside and partly outside the taxi while the argument continued. Before our client was able to call for police assistance, the passenger aggressively punched him on the hand several times. Our client released his grip.

Confronted by two hostile, intoxicated men at night, and in a state of panic, our client then attempted to drive away. Unknown to him, the passenger was still partly inside the taxi.

As the taxi moved forward, the passenger fell to the ground and struck his head. The injury was serious enough to support a charge of Grievous Bodily Harm, an offence for which immediate imprisonment was a very real sentencing possibility.

The consequences for our client were potentially devastating. A term of immediate imprisonment would not only have affected him personally, but also his wife and young children, who were heavily dependent on his income and support.

We began sentencing preparation early because the case required careful and detailed work. The ordinary sentencing range for Grievous Bodily Harm pointed strongly towards a term of imprisonment. Our task was to persuade the Court that, despite the seriousness of the injury, this was an exceptional case in which any term of imprisonment should be suspended.

Detailed written sentencing submissions were prepared and supported by material addressing the full circumstances of the offending and our client’s personal background.

The submissions emphasised that the incident had not arisen from a deliberate attack. It began with two intoxicated passengers refusing to pay a fare, escalated when one attempted to leave, and then deteriorated further when our client was punched while trying to prevent the passenger from leaving before police arrived.

We also relied on the absence of any intention to cause serious injury. Our client’s decision to drive away was made in a state of fear and panic, against the background of a rapidly escalating confrontation.

The Court was asked to consider his otherwise good character, his lack of prior offending, his role as the primary provider for his family, his remorse and insight into what had occurred, the impact that imprisonment would have on his wife and children, and his strong prospects of rehabilitation.

The prosecution accepted that, exceptionally, it was open to the Court to suspend any term of imprisonment. That concession followed the strength of the mitigating material and the way the case had been prepared and presented.

At sentencing, we submitted that the seriousness of the injury could be recognised without requiring our client to serve an immediate term of imprisonment. The Court ultimately agreed.

A Suspended Imprisonment Order was imposed.

The result allowed our client to remain in the community, continue supporting his family and avoid the most severe practical consequence of a Grievous Bodily Harm sentence.

For a man who had come to Australia to build a stable future for his family, the outcome meant that one frightening late-night incident did not result in the complete loss of the life he had worked hard to establish.

August, 2026

Burnt at a BBQ

Aggravated Burglary indictment discontinued after negotiations, with the case resolved on lesser charges and a spent conviction

Published August 2026

What began as an ill-considered attempt to confront a neighbourhood problem was heading towards a District Court trial for Aggravated Burglary, Criminal Damage and Stealing.

Our client came to us only a few months before trial after his former lawyer retired. By that stage, the matter had already been running for more than two years and the prosecution case appeared, at first glance, difficult to overcome.

The allegations arose from an incident involving a resident of a nearby care home who had become the subject of concern among local residents. There were suspicions in the neighbourhood that the resident had been lighting fires and entering surrounding properties.

On the day of the incident, our client was visiting one of those neighbours, who later became his co-client in the prosecution. The pair had spent several hours drinking beer, having a barbecue and swimming on a hot summer’s day. As evening fell, our client was persuaded to accompany his neighbour across the road to the care home to speak to the resident about the concerns that had been circulating in the area.

Still holding drinks, the two men went to the property after sunset. What appears to have begun as an intention to confront a problem quickly escalated into a serious criminal investigation.

A call was made to 000, police became involved, and both men were ultimately charged with offences carrying significant consequences. The prosecution alleged conduct amounting to Aggravated Burglary, together with Criminal Damage and Stealing, placing our client at risk of a District Court trial and the stigma of conviction for a serious indictable offence.

One feature of the evidence appeared particularly damaging. Our client had been captured on CCTV describing what had happened as a “home invasion”. Taken in isolation, those words seemed to support the prosecution’s characterisation of the incident and the seriousness of the Aggravated Burglary charge. They were also the kind of statement that could easily dominate how the case was viewed if the surrounding circumstances were not examined carefully. But a criminal case is not decided by one phrase alone.

We reviewed the prosecution brief in detail, considered the context in which the words had been used, and analysed whether the conduct as a whole truly satisfied the prosecution theory of Aggravated Burglary. That review identified weaknesses in the State’s case and potential avenues of defence that had to be weighed against the risks of proceeding to trial.

The central question became whether the matter really belonged in the District Court as an Aggravated Burglary prosecution, or whether the conduct could more properly be characterised and resolved on a significantly less serious basis.

We commenced negotiations with the prosecution and advanced that position directly. Those negotiations required confronting the difficult evidence rather than ignoring it. In particular, our client’s own reference to a “home invasion” had to be explained in context while demonstrating why that phrase should not determine the legal character of what had occurred. After extended negotiations, the prosecution accepted our proposal.

The Aggravated Burglary indictment was discontinued, the District Court trial was vacated, and the case was resolved by way of lesser charges of Trespass, Damaging Property and Stealing on facts that more fairly reflected the incident.

Removing the Aggravated Burglary charge substantially changed the seriousness of the case, but the work was not over.

Attention then shifted to sentencing and, in particular, to protecting our client from the long-term consequences of having convictions recorded against him. We prepared a spent conviction application supported by material including his apology to the victim, strong character references and detailed submissions addressing his circumstances and the offending. The application succeeded. Our client received a spent conviction order and a fine of just over $1,000.

The result brought an end to a legal ordeal that had lasted about two-and-a-half years. More importantly, it avoided a District Court trial for Aggravated Burglary and the far more serious consequences that could have followed from conviction on the original indictment.

The case illustrates the importance of looking beyond the most damaging piece of evidence in a prosecution brief. Even a client’s own words can take on a different significance when the surrounding circumstances are properly examined and the legal character of the conduct is carefully tested.

July, 2026

#metoo

Indecent assault charge dismissed after a two-day trial, with a substantial costs order made in our client’s favour

Published July 2026

A consensual ‘friends with benefits’ relationship later became the setting for an indecent assault prosecution that placed a 26-year-old man’s reputation, criminal record and future at serious risk.

Our client had no prior criminal convictions and had initially engaged another lawyer before seeking a change in representation in the months leading up to trial. By then, the charge had already been hanging over him for some time and the prospect of being convicted of a sexual offence was understandably causing significant concern.

The allegation arose from a sexual encounter with a woman with whom he had previously been in a casual sexual relationship. They had known each other for some time and had engaged in consensual sexual activity during that arrangement. The history between them was therefore important context, but it did not determine the issue. The question for the Court was whether the particular sexual activity the subject of the charge had occurred with the complainant’s consent. After a period without sexual contact, the pair resumed communicating online. The complainant later invited our client to her home to catch up. According to our client, the interaction that followed developed naturally from their previous relationship. He maintained that the complainant’s words, behaviour and physical interaction led him to understand that she was receptive to sexual activity. Sexual activity then occurred. From the outset, our client’s position was clear and consistent: the encounter had been consensual.

What happened after the encounter was also important. In the days that followed, the pair continued exchanging online messages. Those communications did not suggest that the complainant had felt uncomfortable, objected to what had occurred or believed that our client had crossed a sexual boundary. That material became part of the broader evidentiary picture when the allegation was later investigated.

Several months after the encounter, our client was charged with committing a sexual act without consent. He participated in a lengthy police interview and maintained throughout that the sexual activity had been consensual. By the time he came to us, the matter was approaching trial. We reviewed the prosecution brief in detail, including the complainant’s account, our client’s police interview and the online communications between the parties. That review led us to form the view that our client had strong prospects of successfully defending the charge. The case ultimately proceeded to a two-day trial in the Magistrates Court.

As with many sexual offence prosecutions, the outcome depended heavily on the credibility and reliability of the complainant’s account. There was no simple forensic answer to the central issue of consent. The Court was required to assess the evidence carefully, including the history between the parties, the circumstances surrounding the encounter, what was said and done at the time, and the communications that followed. The complainant was cross-examined about her account and the surrounding circumstances.

Our client elected to give evidence and provided what we considered to be a compelling and consistent account of the encounter. His evidence remained that the sexual activity had been consensual and that nothing in the complainant’s conduct at the time suggested otherwise to him. After hearing the evidence, the Magistrate found that the complainant was not a credible witness. The charge was dismissed and a judgment of acquittal was entered.

The acquittal was particularly significant given the nature of the allegation. A conviction for a sexual offence can have consequences extending far beyond the sentence imposed by the Court, including serious reputational, professional and personal effects.

We also made an application for costs on our client’s behalf and secured a substantial costs order in his favour.

The result brought the prosecution to an end without a conviction being recorded against our client. After facing the uncertainty and stigma of a sexual offence allegation, he was able to move forward with his criminal record and reputation intact.

The case also demonstrated the importance of examining the whole of the evidence in a contested consent prosecution. The history between the parties, their communications, their conduct before and after the alleged offence, and the credibility of the evidence given at trial can all be critical to the final outcome.

June, 2026

Vengeful failure

Assault and property damage allegations ended in judgments of acquittal after the prosecution offered no evidence at trial

Published June 2026

A bitter relationship breakdown produced allegations of assault and property damage that threatened not only our client’s liberty and criminal record, but also his employment and professional future.

The allegations were made by a former partner following the end of a long-term, on-again off-again relationship. By the time the matter came to court, the relationship had deteriorated significantly and the allegations had become part of a broader and highly charged dispute between the parties.

Our client denied the allegations from the outset. The prosecution alleged that he had assaulted his former partner and damaged property during the course of the relationship breakdown. For our client, the stakes were particularly high. A criminal conviction could have had consequences extending far beyond the immediate penalty imposed by the Court, including damage to his reputation, employment prospects and future professional opportunities. Given those risks, the matter was prepared carefully for trial.

We reviewed the prosecution brief in detail, examined the complainant’s account and considered the evidence of the only other witness. We also obtained material from defence witnesses and worked through the sequence of events so that the case could be presented clearly if the matter proceeded to a contested hearing.

The preparation was directed not only to the factual allegations themselves, but also to the credibility and reliability of the prosecution case. Shortly before trial, the prosecution advised that the complainant and the only other prosecution witness were no longer willing to give evidence under oath and were no longer cooperating with police. That development significantly changed the position. Without the complainant and the supporting witness, the prosecution case faced obvious difficulties. The prosecution initially indicated that it intended to discontinue the charges.

At first glance, that might have appeared to be the ideal outcome. For our client, however, a simple discontinuance did not necessarily provide the finality he needed.
A charge that is discontinued may, depending on the circumstances, leave open the possibility of the prosecution being brought again in the future. For someone whose employment and professional reputation were already under a cloud because of the allegations, that uncertainty was important. Our client wanted the matter brought to a complete end.

On the morning of trial, we therefore pressed for a more definitive resolution. Rather than simply allowing the charges to be discontinued, we sought an outcome that would prevent the allegations from hanging over our client indefinitely. We successfully persuaded the prosecutor to offer no evidence in relation to each charge.
That distinction was important. Once the prosecutor offered no evidence, the Magistrate entered judgments of acquittal on the charges.

The result was not merely that the prosecution stopped. The charges were brought to a final conclusion in court, with acquittals formally entered in our client’s favour.
For our client, that finality was critical. He no longer faced the risk of a criminal conviction arising from the allegations, and he was no longer left with the concern that the same charges might simply be revived at some later date. The result also allowed him to move forward professionally and personally without the uncertainty of unresolved criminal proceedings continuing to affect his future.

Following the acquittals, we also applied for an order that our client’s legal costs be paid. The costs application was granted in an amount substantially similar to that sought. That order was an important additional outcome. Our client had been required to incur legal expenses in preparing to defend allegations which, by the morning of trial, the prosecution was no longer in a position to prove.

The final result was therefore comprehensive. Our client avoided criminal convictions for the assault and property damage allegations, obtained formal judgments of acquittal, secured finality in relation to the prosecution, and recovered a substantial proportion of his legal costs.

The case demonstrates why the precise way in which criminal charges are brought to an end can matter. A discontinued prosecution and a judgment of acquittal are not always the same thing from a client’s perspective. In this case, ensuring that the prosecution ended with formal acquittals gave our client the certainty he needed after a difficult relationship breakdown and allowed him to move forward without the allegations continuing to cast a shadow over his professional future.

June, 2026

No looking back

Protective bail breach discontinued after an automated Instagram notification, with the related assault resolved on amended facts and a spent conviction

Published June 2026

In the dying days of a strained marriage, an argument between our client and his former wife escalated into a physical confrontation. Both maintained that the other had been the instigator and aggressor. It was our client, however, who was charged with assault and released on protective bail.

The bail conditions were strict. He was prohibited from contacting his former wife and was required to leave the matrimonial home. For someone already dealing with the breakdown of a marriage, those conditions added another layer of stress and uncertainty. Any breach, even one arising from an apparently minor interaction, carried the risk of further criminal consequences. A few days later, while using Instagram, our client inadvertently saved a reel to his default collection. That seemingly harmless action triggered an automatically generated notification to his former wife’s account. She regarded the notification as prohibited contact and reported it to police.

Our client was then charged with breaching his protective bail conditions, despite there having been no deliberate message, conversation or attempt to communicate with her. What had begun as a routine use of social media had suddenly become a second criminal charge. The allegation raised an important question: could an automatically generated Instagram notification, caused by an inadvertent action, properly amount to prohibited contact under the bail conditions?

Our client pleaded not guilty to both the assault charge and the alleged protective bail breach. The matters were listed for trial and we prepared to contest each charge.

The assault allegation itself was not straightforward. Our client’s former wife maintained that he had been the aggressor, while our client gave a different account of the confrontation. He maintained that the incident had arisen in the context of a highly strained relationship and that her role in the physical confrontation was significant.

The case therefore required close attention not only to what had happened, but also to how the facts were framed. In domestic and relationship-related prosecutions, the wording of the prosecution facts can materially affect how the Court understands the incident and the level of responsibility attributed to each person.

The alleged bail breach raised a different issue. There had been no intentional contact in the ordinary sense. No direct message had been sent, no conversation had taken place, and there had been no attempt by our client to communicate with his former wife. The notification was generated automatically by the social-media platform as a consequence of the reel being saved.

In the lead-up to trial, we prepared to challenge both the assault allegation and the protective bail breach. On the morning of trial, however, the prosecution’s position softened and an opportunity emerged to negotiate a more proportionate outcome. We persuaded the prosecution to discontinue the protective bail breach charge entirely. In exchange, our client agreed to plead guilty to the assault charge, but importantly, only on substantially amended facts. The revised facts acknowledged the role played by his former wife in the confrontation and presented a more balanced account of the incident. Rather than portraying our client as the sole aggressor, the amended version reflected the broader circumstances in which the physical confrontation had occurred. That change was significant both in principle and in sentencing. The factual basis on which a person is sentenced can influence how the Court assesses culpability, seriousness and the appropriate penalty.

With the bail breach withdrawn and the assault facts amended, the matter proceeded to sentence on a much more favourable basis. The Court imposed a modest fine and granted a spent conviction order. The combined result was important. Our client avoided a conviction for breaching protective bail, was sentenced on a more balanced version of the assault allegation, and obtained a spent conviction, allowing him to move forward without the enduring consequences that might otherwise have followed.

For someone already navigating the breakdown of a marriage, that outcome provided a measure of finality. The case also highlights how quickly relationship breakdowns can generate overlapping criminal and bail issues. Protective bail conditions are often broad and strict, and modern technology can complicate questions about what constitutes contact. Something as innocuous as an automated social-media notification can become the basis of an alleged breach, even where no deliberate communication was intended.

In this case, careful preparation and negotiation ensured that the social-media bail allegation was discontinued, the assault facts were substantially amended and the matter concluded with a modest penalty and a spent conviction.

Recent Cases

Blind spot steers into a tight spot

Motorbike Police Pursuit Charges Reduced Before Trial

False Cover, Real Prison, Swift Release

Fraud charges, restitution and suspended imprisonment on appeal

Stunts can turn into growth

Reckless driving and unlawful database access offences resolved without immediate imprisonment

Avoidable Ahoy

Twelve-year-old Leederville assault charge discontinued after serious flaws emerged in the prosecution’s identification evidence

A taxing ordeal

Taxi driver avoids immediate imprisonment after sentencing for grievous bodily harm

Burnt at a BBQ

Aggravated Burglary indictment discontinued after negotiations, with the case resolved on lesser charges and a spent conviction

#metoo

Indecent assault charge dismissed after a two-day trial, with a substantial costs order made in our client’s favour

Vengeful failure

Assault and property damage allegations ended in judgments of acquittal after the prosecution offered no evidence at trial

No looking back

Protective bail breach discontinued after an automated Instagram notification, with the related assault resolved on amended facts and a spent conviction

Navigation & Sitemaps

Legal/Compliances

Follow Us