Date and location of Offence(s)
November 2020, Thornbury
Heidelberg Magistrates’ Court
Our client was charged with Assault Emergency Officer (Indictable), Assault Emergency Officer (Summary), Resist Arrest, Drunk in a public place.
The facts of the alleged offending that were not disputed were that our client had consumed too much alcohol over the course of several hours, and having unsuccessfully attempted to hail down a taxi, boarded a tram and had behaved aggressively towards a Protective Services Officer resulting in his arrest and subsequent confinement in a police watch house.
Following our client’s release from the police station on bail, he was compelled to attend the Heidelberg Magistrates’ Court to answer the following offences:
Assault Emergency Worker (Indictable) – Section 31(ba) of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic)
Assault Emergency Worker (Summary Offence) – Section 51 of the Summary Offences Act 1996 (Vic)
Resist Arrest (Summary Offence) – Section 51 of the Summary Offences Act 1996 (Vic)
Drunk and disorderly in public (Summary Offence) – Section 14 of the Summary Offences Act 1966 (Vic)
How case resolved
Because of the strength of the prosecution case, our client provided early instructions he intended to plead guilty. Of most concern to our client was the Indictable charge of Assault Emergency Worker. The offence of Assault Emergency Worker has two forms: indictable and summary. The indictable offence attracts a maximum of 5 years imprisonment, whereas the summary version is less serious: As a result of case conference negotiations, the Indictable charge of Assault Emergency Worker was withdrawn, and as was the offence of Resist arrest. The summary offence of Assault emergency worker proceeded as a plea as did the offence of Drunk and disorderly in a public place.
Factors relevant to client
Our client had a limited criminal history, but his previous convictions were alcohol related (traffic offences and one previous for unlawful assault). Since the offending, our client sought out counselling under a Mental Health Plan.
With conviction, Adjourned Undertaking for 12 months with conditions to pay $750 into the Court Fund and continue to receive counselling.
A comprehensive plea was made on behalf of our client, and the outcome court outcome reflected several factors namely: our client’s early plea of guilty, his limited court history, and the steps he had taken towards his rehabilitation.