Our client, Mr. P, was accused of domestic assault by a former partner in the midst of contentious family law proceedings. Based on historical allegations, he was accused of hitting her in the head during a verbal argument, leading to her getting a concussion. Mr. P denied these accusations: he didn’t believe that this incident had occurred.
Our client, Mr. F, was a middle-aged man with no criminal record. He found himself accused of a number of offences relating to the finding of a significant number of firearms and narcotics. After he was held for bail, he retained our firm to represent him in his bail hearing.
Our client, Mr. F, was accused by a close family member of sexual assault, indecent exposure, and assault. He was accused of sexually assaulting her when she was young, and later exposing himself to her. He was also accused of committing an assault on her
Our client, Ms. F, was the complainant in an incident with her common-law spouse. She called police, stating that her spouse had put his hand over her mouth and harassed her, with the intention of having him placed in a 72-hour psychiatric hold.
Mr. P was charged with six counts, including assault with a weapon and assault causing bodily harm. Ms. J accused Mr. P of choking her.
Our client’s ability to come to Canada and obtain permanent resident status was put in serious jeopardy, however, when he was arrested and charged with assault.
The goal was to get both accused acquitted of the charges of assault causing bodily harm. To do this, our lawyers aimed to establish that the accused had acted in self-defence against the actions of the complainant.
In order to negotiate a plea deal with the Crown, our lawyer aimed to raise doubt regarding the Crown’s reasonable prospect of conviction in this case.
Based on the circumstances, the goal of the client was to have all of the criminal charges withdrawn. This would mean that these new charges would not appear on his criminal record.
In order to get the client released on bail, it was important to mitigate all three grounds for pre-trial detention.
Our goal here was to have our client released from jail pending his trial by establishing that neither of the grounds for pre-trial detention were met.
The goal here was to have the accused found ‘not guilty’ by raising a reasonable doubt as to whether he had actually committed the act in question.
The client’s goal was to resolve the charges in a way that would not harm her chances at being successful in her permanent residency application. For this, any result leading to no criminal conviction would have been advantageous.