← More Recent Successes success stories

Client found not guilty of Sexual Assault after five day judge alone trial by Zoom, in the Superior Court, Toronto. D.J. was accused by his wife’s sister of sexually assaulting her when she had been staying at the apartment of D.J. and his wife. The complainant moved in with D.J. and his wife due to her financial circumstances. About a week or so after moving in, she alleged that D.J. had entered her room around 2:00 a.m. and sexually assaulted her. She allegedly disclosed the allegation about a week later to D.J.’s wife and then did not go to the police until about one month later after her tires were slashed. Joseph Neuberger was retained as his criminal defence lawyer Toronto. The disclosure consisted of a statement from the complainant and another sister of the complainant R.B. There was no physical evidence to support the allegations and the complainant had two dogs staying with her in her room at the apartment that D.J. was supposed to have removed without causing any noise prior to the sexual assault. There was a history between the complainant and D.J. as to a prior sexual relationship that was relevant to the defence narrative and why the complainant stated certain things about the alleged sexual assault and defence evidence that the complainant actually divulged the affair as opposed to a sexual assault to D.J.’s wife. All of this background information was highly relevant to issues of credibility and the defence narrative. As such, at trial Joseph Neuberger, brought a prior sexual history application under section 276/278 of the Criminal Code which was successful. At trial cross-examination of the complainant was lengthy detailed and confrontational yielding credibility issues but also intentional twisting of evidence particularly in relation to evidence of R.B.. In fact, in cross examination of the complainant criminal defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger alleged that she only told her sister of the details of the alleged sexual assault on the day she called police. The complainant stated that in fact she told her sister R.B. a month prior. The defence called R.B. and the evidence established that she was only told about the allegations on the date police was called about one month after the alleged assault. This was significant in a series of events yielding a motive to fabricate the allegation. D.J. was prepared for testimony and at trial proved to be a reliable witness. As such, the trial judge found D.J. not guilty of sexual assault.
Read More