Case study: Breach Intervention Order x 2

Date and location of Offence(s)


September 2020


Court venue


Dandenong Magistrates’ Court


Facts & Offences


Our client was charged with Breach Intervention Order x 2. The breaches alleged repeated text messages (that were not permitted under the childcare arrangement exception) and two phone calls to the complainant (which were not answered).


The breaches occurred in 6 months into the Intervention Order and had occurred against a background of a marriage of some 18 years, and ongoing difficulties with a parenting arrangement with respect to their children which was informal. although the offending was not overtly abusive, aggressive, or harassing or sent to intimidate, the tone of the communication was offensive to the complainant, and outside the permitted exception of communication pertaining to childcare arrangements.


How case resolved


An application for a diversion was made but rejected by the prosecution, the case then proceeded as a plea of guilty.


Factors relevant to client


The Court heard submissions as to the appropriate penalty and the Court’s attention was drawn to the following factors:


- That our client had been married to the complainant for some 18 years and there were no previous reported incidents of family violence.

- That our client had no criminal history whatsoever, and was in his early 50’s.

- That the subject communication had occurred in the context of ongoing difficulties concerning the appropriate medical treatment of their son.

- That our client was genuinely remorseful for the breach

- That our client had engaged a family law practitioner to assist in negotiating better parenting arrangements to avoid potential conflict with his former wife and deliver more certainty to days and times at which he could see his children.


Several excellent character references were also tendered to the Court. These references evidenced our client’s community involvement, and good character generally.


Outcome


Our client avoided a criminal conviction and was placed on an Adjourned undertaking to be of good behaviour for 6 months and to pay $400 into the Court Fund.




11 views0 comments