Our Result - Case Study - Aggravated Assault written by James Caldicott

Reference: 15010810


This is a case of 2 counts of aggravating assault police and possession of an offensive weapon.


This is a case of 2 counts of aggravating assault police and possession of an offensive weapon.

Our client faced several charges arising out of an incident involving two police officers having attended his premises after seeing him drive a vehicle whilst disqualified. The charges he faced before the Magistrates Court at Trial was 2 counts of aggravated assault (assaulting a police officer) and possession of an offensive weapon (namely a butchers knife). Our client provided instructions that the facts as stated by police was incorrect and omitted a number of relevant factors. He disputed what they said occurred and provided instructions as to the circumstances of the offence.

The case reached the Trial stage of proceedings and through discussions with Prosecution had concentrated on disputed facts, especially in relation to the aggravated assault charges. The circumstances of the offence relate to the police officers attending our client’s premises and a collision with a roller door. Prosecution attempted to lead that the conduct of our client amounted to a set of circumstances evident of the offence. However at this stage Prosecution hadn’t elected as to what conduct our client was purported to have done that amounted to the individual counts.

James Caldicott acted on our client’s behalf at the Christies Beach Magistrates Court.

At the outset of the Trial Defence Counsel raised a number of legal issues which meant that Prosecution had to elect which incident actually amounted to the charges as laid. Prosecution then attempted to elect a specific charge but then lay additional charges so as not to cause them embarrassment.

Subsequently an application was made by Defence Counsel that given Prosecution had laid additional counts that some of them crossed over with matters currently at Trial. It was put to the Magistrate sitting that since there was an overlap if the matters were to proceed then the charges before the Court to be heard for Trial must be dismissed so that the new charges can be heard.

Prosecution subsequently then dismissed the charges before the Court and attempted to relay new charges. However given our client had entered a plea of not guilty already in relation to the first matter that has now been dismissed it was raised that Prosecution were unable to proceed with the matter generally because they had already tried to prosecute him once.

This was an exceptional result for our client as he was ultimately acquitted of the offences due to the use of legal concepts by our firm.


find out more about James Caldicott