The criminal justice system can be daunting, but you don’t need to go through it alone. Our Criminal lawyers are here to guide you every step of the way.
Contact Our Firm
Client acquitted of charges of Assault with Weapon x 4 (Domestic), Threat Death x 2, Sexual Assault, Assault x 3, Attempt Sexual Assault and Breach Undertaking after an eight (8) day trial in the Ontario Court of Justice in Newmarket. After a bitter separation and a decision by the court to place the children in the care of Mr. R.G., the former wife went to police an alleged historical physical and sexual abuse. There were two very lengthy statements provided by the complainant. Defence lawyers John Navarrete and Joseph Neuberger were the defence team on the file. After careful analysis of the statements, a chart of inconsistencies was drafted to assist with cross-examination. The defence lawyers obtained from the client emails, text messages, pictures, reports of experts and all the family court documentation to draft a very detailed and thorough cross-examination of the complainant. A lengthy probing cross-examination revealed serious issues of credibility and reliability of the complainant and the obvious motivation to fabricate the allegations to gain custody back of the children. In fact, after the charges were laid, the complainant drew on the criminal allegations to remove custody of the children from R.G. The client testified in his own defence. After detailed written submissions, the Court found Mr. R.G. not guilty of all counts.
Charges of Assault Peace Officer x 2, Mischief to Property, Trespass and Public Intoxication withdrawn after lengthy negotiations with the Crown and police. Client had a bad night with heavy drinking. When ejected from a bar, the client was not the best in public and police were called. Unfortunately, the intervention of police resulted in a scuffle that then wound up in the client being charged with a number of offences. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger had lengthy discussions with the Crown and had the client perform community service, take various therapy programs, and undertake other restorative steps that ultimately resulted in the Crown withdrawing all charges.
Charges of domestic assault, threaten death, obstruct justice, intimidate a justice participant, and fail to comply x 2, dismissed after a four day trial. S.G. was alleged to have assaulted his daughter in law, and threatened to kill her. After he was charged, the complainant attended police again and alleged that S.G. re-attended the home and not only communicated with her but attempted to have her change her story to police by threatening her with further violence. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger was hired. After carefully scrutinizing the complainant’s evidence, Joseph Neuberger, obtained statements from S.G.’s surety and neighbours to show that at no time did S.G. return to the home where his daughter was living and obtained medical evidence about physical restrictions that S.G. had which were inconsistent with the manner in which the complainant alleged the assault occurred. At trial, Joseph Neuberger, cross-examined the complainant extensively and established material inconsistencies not only between her two statements but also within her in court testimony. Many of the inconsistencies were not supportive of the allegations and significantly damaged her reliability and credibility. During the second phase of the trial, upon careful consideration of the evidence, the Crown attorney directed the judge that there was no longer any prospect of conviction and S.G. was found not guilty of all charges.
Charges of domestic assault and mischief under withdrawn after extensive negotiations with the Crown. The client and the complainant have been married for a number of years with five children. During a heated argument about ending the marriage, the police were called an allegations of domestic violence were made. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger was retained and after reviewing the disclosure, Joseph Neuberger obtained from the client a series of text messages that suggested, prior to the argument, that the complainant was particularly angry at the suggestion that J.N. would want to end the marriage and was fore warning about possible charges. After extensive discussions with the Crown, the bail was varied so that J.N. could return home and the complainant and J.N. were allowed to attend marital counselling. After an extensive period of counselling the Crown agreed to withdrawn the charges in favour of a common law peace bond..
Client found not guilty of charges of Internet Luring x 2, and Obtaining the Sexual Services of a Person Under 18 after two day trial in the Ontario Court of Justice. The client was charged in a York Regional Police project called “Raphael” designed to catch individuals who are attempting to obtain services of minors. The client had messaged a lady who advertised on the Backpages website and unbeknownst to the client the person at the other end was an undercover police officer. The main issue was given the context of the communications, the timing and sequencing of messages, did the client take reasonable steps to ascertain the person purported to be the escort was older than 18. The defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger established through cross-examination at trial that P.L. had in fact inquired about age and because of the overlap in messaging, P.L. had the reasonable belief that the alleged escort was actually 25, when in fact the undercover officer was referring to an amount of money in his messages but without the use of a dollar sign. Joseph Neuberger carefully scrutinized the messages and obtained a forensic analysis of the client’s phone to establish timing of the messages. A comprehensive book of authorities was filed at trial by the defence and it was clear to the judge that P.L.’s belief that the person he thought he was communicating with was 25 and not underage, and thus he had taken “reasonable steps” to ascertain the age and was satisfied that she was 25 years of age. This was a very technical defence based on the evidence and case law, BUT P.L. was sincere and honest in his belief and was found not guilty at trial.
Charges of Kidnapping x 2, Extortion, Assault Causing Bodily Harm, Assault with Weapon, Point Firearm, Criminal Organizations, stayed in the Ontario Court of Justice at the preliminary hearing. The client was alleged to have kidnapped and assaulted a Chinese Visa student as a result of an issue regarding a young lady and for the purposes of extortion. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger obtained video surveillance from the various locations showing the complainant was not under the control of the client and in fact appeared to be interacting in a friendly manner. The alleged injuries as reflected in the medical records were not consistent with the alleged beatings. Further, Joseph Neuberger interviewed several defence witnesses and provided the evidence to the Crown. The complainant left Canada and the Crown sought mutual legal assistance from the People’s Republic of China but the defence challenged the use of video testimony as the laws of China were to apply to the preliminary hearing. The defence was successful on a motion and the Crown stayed all charges.
Charges of Assault x 3, Weapons Dangerous x 3, Threaten Death x 2 and Forcible Confinement withdrawn on the first day of trial. The client was charged with a number of domestic related offences. The complainant brought the allegations after deciding to separate from A.P. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger raised significant inconsistencies between the statement of the complainant, her daughter’s statement, and Affidavit material filed in the Family Court Proceeding. Cross examination focused on these inconsistencies. After a break in the trial the Crown withdrew the charges as a result of no reasonable prospect of conviction.
Charges of Sexual Assault, Assault Causing Bodily Harm, Assault x 2, and Threaten Death (Domestic), dismissed after seven day trial in the Ontario Court of Justice at 1000 Finch Avenue West. S.P. was alleged to have sexually and physically abused his niece from the moment she arrived in Canada from March of 2012 up to January 7, 2015. The complainant had medical records demonstrating that she sustained injuries including a broken nose, bruising and puncture wounds. The medical records were from her visit to hospital at the time S.P. was arrested. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger was retained as the lead defence counsel and Mariya Protsenko as the second defence lawyer on the file. Careful review and scrutiny of the complainant’s statement and medical records was conducted along with an extensive defence investigation. A private investigator was hired who interviewed three independent witnesses that testified at trial as to observing the complainant fall on January 7th and sustain certain injuries and another witness as to the compliant having confided in her that the complainant wanted to break up S.P.’s marriage so that she could marry him and obtain immigration status in Canada. At trial, the complainant’s evidence became far more detailed and extensive than in her statement to police. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger cross-examined the complainant over a two day period putting to her numerous inconsistencies, omissions and improbable assertions that undermined her credibility. Joseph Neuberger utilized the medical records to also undermine the complainant’s evidence about the alleged physical and sexual abuse. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger retained a defence medical expert in order to assert in cross-examination that the medical records proffered by the Crown were inconsistent with the evidence of the alleged abuse. Further, the defence marshalled the theory that the complainant lied about the allegations to protect her secret agenda that had been discovered by S.P. on January 7th and was to be exposed to her family. After extensive a detailed cross-examination of the complainant and Crown witnesses, the defence called three independent witnesses and then rested its case. The Court determined that the complainant was not credible or reliable and thus found S.P. not guilty of all charges.
After a trial lasting over 3 years, with numerous civilian and police witnesses being called, client acquitted of several charges in the Ontario Court of Justice, including assaulting peace officer and assault with a weapon. Client was charged with several offences after an incident occurred in an apartment building in Toronto, which ultimately resulted in the client being shot 5 times with a C-8 assault rifle by police. Extensive cross-examination of all witnesses revealed inconsistencies in the evidence which resulted in all charges being dismissed.
Client acquitted of 2 counts of sexual assault and forcible confinement relating to two different complainants, in two separate incidents that occurred at a work party. Both complainants were extensively cross-examined by lawyer Stacey Nichols, revealing serious inconsistencies in their stories which resulted in the client being acquitted of all charges in the Superior Court of Justice, Brampton. Defence witnesses were also called by Ms. Nichols which contradicted both Complainant’s version of events.
Past results are not necessarily indicative of future results and that the amount recovered and other litigation outcomes will vary according to the facts in individual cases.
