Shopping centre assault affray

Good Behaviour for Common Assault Offence

Shape

Table of Contents

Our solicitor, Stephanie McClelland, represented a middle-aged male at Mount Druitt Local Court in relation to the following charge:

  • Common Assault pursuant to Section 61 of the Crimes Act 1900.

Common Assault Case Details

The case involved our client and his partner communicating with their internet provider about returning two modems they recently received from an online purchase. They made 3 phone calls and were dissatisfied with the customer service provided by the company’s Customer Call Centre, and decided to attend the store themselves, located in a Westfields shopping centre. In store, they were advised by the manager, whom was a witness in this event, that the store was unable to accept the modems, and replacements for the products were also unavailable. The manager proceeded to push the modems back into our client’s hands causing pain in the abdomen. An argument about the Customer Call Centre ensued, leading to the victim, whom was also an employee of the company, to approach our client and his partner. The victim insulted our client and his partner calling them derogatory names and instructed our client and his partner to leave the store. Security was called to escort our client and his partner out of the store.

Whilst our client’s partner was speaking with security, our client walked back into the store and threw two boxed modems towards the victim’s face, with one of the modems hitting the victim’s hands as she tried to defend herself by covering her head. The other modem narrowly missed the victim and two other customers who were getting served by the victim. No injuries were sustained by the victim, and our client later attended Mount Druitt Police Station to report the incident himself. He was cautioned, interviewed, and admitted to the allegations stating, “I know I did the wrong thing.”

The Court’s Decision – Section 9(1)(b)

On sentence, Ms McClelland gave thorough and in-depth submissions. These included an apology letter written by our client upon our advice, several character references which highlighted the otherwise good nature of our client, personal circumstances including no prior criminal convictions of any kind, his accountability including acceptance of full responsibility by entering an early guilty plea, remorse as indicated through reporting the matter himself, and commitment to his own rehabilitation by discussing the matter at length with his partner and support networks.

Outcome Achieved – Conditional Release Order (CRO)

The Court found the offence proven, however dismissed the matter without proceeding to conviction. Our client was directed to enter a Conditional Release Order (CRO) to be of good behaviour for a period of 6 months, pursuant to Section 9(1)(b) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. This was a successful outcome.

This case demonstrates the importance of outstanding representation. Stephanie ensured the case was prepared and presented thoroughly and in a way the Court would consider all relevant circumstances in favour of our client on sentence.

Shape

02 8806 0866

Book Online

WE GET IT

Explore More Legal Resources and Articles

Commercial Contract Law Submarine

Whatever floats your…submarine

Australia backs out of contract with French company Naval Group In 2016, Australia signed a contract with French company Naval Group to supply Australia with

FB defamation

Defamation Claim Defence

Defamation Claim Successfully Defended Our principal solicitor and team of barristers settled a defamation claim against our client. The matter was listed for hearing at the

WE'RE IN IT TO WIN IT

Book your free consultation