Domestic Assault Successes
R. v. B.A.
A short and difficult marriage ended abruptly with a complaint to the police by the soon to be ex-wife. The wife brought videos of conduct and pictures of injuries to the police making allegations that could have been devastating to B.A.’s career. The wife was seeking extraordinary remedies in family court. The case ended during cross-examination when the wife was confronted with evidence she did not know the defence had in its file. The wife was exposed as incredible. This evidence damaged the wife’s credibility to the point where a successful prosecution was untenable.
R. v. D.B.
Three separate incidents of domestic violence were reported. The relationship by all accounts was toxic and immature. A motion for directed verdict was successful at the end of the Crown Attorney’s case, and only one charge remained. The evidence called by Mr. Weisberg left the judge with a reasonable doubt and D.B. was found not guilty
R. v. A.B.
A young man was accused of punching his girlfriend in the face three times in the middle of the street in front of bystanders. The complainant, a university student, also alleged a vicious beating months earlier that involved choking, kicking, punching and threatening. The young man and Mr. Weisberg immediately gathered evidence that would later help establish his innocence at trial. The complainant and her family were eager to proceed to trial.
Mr. Weisberg methodically and repeatedly exposed lies and inconsistencies in the complainant’s testimony. The complainant was also confronted with extrinsic evidence that was completely inconsistent with her testimony. She was merely a jilted lover on a revenge mission. In the middle of cross-examination, the Crown Attorney asked Mr. Weisberg to stop asking questions so he could invite an acquittal.
R. v. R.J.
The accused was a young professional dating an exotic dancer. The client and his girlfriend became involved in a heated argument outside of a nightclub. The complainant accused J.R. of pushing her to the ground. She made accusations that back at their house he choked and slapped her.
Mr. Weisberg successfully argued that the matter ought to be stayed for unreasonable delay. R.J. still has no criminal record. He faced other charges of fail to comply which were later withdrawn.
R. v. B.P.
The accused was charged with assaulting his common-law wife and causing her bodily harm by giving her a black eye. Mr. Weisberg successfully argued that there was an unreasonable delay. The charges were dismissed.
R. v. J.H.
J.H. was arrested for assault cause bodily harm. The complainant was J.H.’s long-term girlfriend. The complainant had serious injuries to her face. The complainant’s older brother did not approve of his sister’s relationship with J.H. for religious reasons. Mr. Weisberg satisfied the trial judge that the older brother committed the assault on his younger sister and not J.H. The client was found not guilty.
R. v. R.C.
The accused allegedly pushed his wife to the ground while she was holding their baby. During the trial, a very dysfunctional relationship was exposed. The woman’s version of events to the police was discredited, and R.C. was found not guilty.
R. v. L.R.
This case began because of a bitter separation. Our client got in a serious fight in a parking lot with her ex-partner. The fight was over the family mini-van. Our client was accused of scratching her ex-partner’s face with her fingernails. The husband had consistent injuries to his face. Our client was found not guilty based on self-defense.
R. v. H.S.
The accused’s wife was a doctor. She accused him of repeated domestic violence spanning months. Midway through the trial, the Crown withdrew the charges against H.S. because Mr. Weisberg demonstrated significant inconsistencies in the evidence.
R. v. H.O.
A young couple had been going through a difficult period in their relationship. H.O’s girlfriend accused him of viciously beating her during an argument. At trial, the complainant was exposed as a liar and H.O. was found not guilty.