R. v. S.D.
A scuffle outside of a bar led to aggravated assault and assault cause bodily harm charges against a young university student. After cross examination of the main witness, the charges were withdrawn because there was no longer a reasonable prospect of conviction.
R. v. H.H.
The client was charged with assault cause bodily harm in relation to a work incident. His co-worker suffered injuries to his face. Mr. H intended to argue his application of force was done in self-defence. The trial was delayed, and an application was brought to seek a stay of the charges for unreasonable delay. Mr. Weisberg was successful, and the charges were stayed. A stay is tantamount to an acquittal.
R. v. L.T.
The accused had no criminal record. He was twenty years old. He faced two counts of assault causing bodily harm, and the prosecutors were seeking a lengthy jail sentence. A “Donnybrook“ erupted inside a nightclub and flooded out onto the street. Once the crowd settled, two injured men were left on the pavement outside the bar. They both required medical attention at the hospital. The accused was charged with punching one complainant causing a concussion and breaking his teeth. He was also charged with causing deep cuts and a post-secondary concussion to the second complainant. Through cross-examination and defence witness testimony it was established that someone else hit the first complainant. The second complainant was discredited and the accused successfully advanced a self-defence argument resulting in acquittals on both counts. The accused still has no criminal record.
R. v. R.R.
The client was a member of a fraternity, and he was charged with mischief and assault bodily harm. He was alleged to have defaced property of the complainant. The complainant alleged that when he confronted the client that he was punched out. The complainant’s credibility was attacked under cross-examination successfully. The judge acquitted the client finding that the defence of self-defence was successfully raised and that she was not satisfied that the accused had defaced the complainant’s posters.
A young woman tried to return a gently used item back to a store in a large retail mall. She was met with sarcasm from the sales clerks. The customer and the clerks started berating each other, and a conflict moved out into the mall. One of the clerks claimed to be pushed to the ground by our client and broke her wrist. After cross-examinations, the three store clerks’ credibility was damaged. The client was found not guilty of assault and assault cause bodily harm.