The Court: Melbourne Children’s Court
The Lawyer: Tom Woodward
The Charges:
The Allegations:
The client was with a group of four friends in the city. One of the friends entered a liquor store and stole a bottle of spirits. Our client waited outside. Upon exiting the store, the group’s first member handed the bottle to one of the others, and the group continued walking.
An undercover Detective Sergeant witnessed the incident and reported it to the local police. Police attended and apprehended the group. All five members of the group were charged with theft based on the allegation that they were acting in concert.
At Court:
The prosecution was unwilling to withdraw the charge because their key witness, the Detective Sergeant, was confident that she had heard the group planning the theft and celebrating after the first member returned with the bottle.
Our solicitor advised the client that it was a weak prosecution case and he had good prospects of winning if the matter was to go to a contested hearing. On that basis, the client entered a formal plea of not guilty and the matter was contested.
The issue in the case was that the prosecution’s witness, the Detective Sergeant, had not identified the individual co-accused; therefore, she could not positively state what each co-accused had said. Despite this, prosecutors continued to pursue the case against the client.
The Outcome:
On the day of the contested hearing, lengthy discussions were held during case conferencing with the prosecutors at the court. During these discussions, prosecutors decided to withdraw the charge. Therefore, the matter went before the Magistrate, where the prosecutor formally applied to withdraw the charge against our client.
Due to the weak prosecution case, this matter should have been withdrawn earlier in the proceedings. Nonetheless, it was an excellent outcome for the client, who avoided the ordeal of giving evidence at court.
