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 charged with domestic assault in the Ontario Court of Justice in Kitchener. Lawyer John Navarrete conducted a Crown Pre-Trial with the Crown Attorney’s office. Mr. Navarrete demonstrated to the Crown that the complainant could not be believed given the surveillance video. Mr. Navarrete also provided character letters of the client’s good standing in the community. As a result, the Client completed the PAR program, entered into a peace bond and the charges were withdrawn.
Client charged with Sexual Assault and Sexual Interference at the Ontario Court of Justice at Old City Hall for an alleged incident that occurred on New Year’s Eve. The client was acquitted after a three day trial. Lawyer John Navarrete conducted a thorough cross examination of the child complainant and was able to demonstrate that the version of events could not have occurred when compared to other Crown witnesses’ evidence.
Charge of domestic assault withdrawn at the Scarborough Courthouse prior to setting a date for trial. S.R. was in a relationship with the complainant for approximately four years. On the day of the alleged incident the two had been in an argument about financial issues as they attended Scarborough Town Centre. As a result of the argument, the two ended their relationship. However, during the argument S.R. was alleged to have yelled at the complainant and “elbowed” her. Two security guards who were in the vicinity heard the argument and allegedly witnessed the assault. S.R. was arrested for assault. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger obtained the exterior surveillance for the mall and nothing was shown on the video other than S.R. being in close proximity to the complainant. As a result, Joseph Neuberger negotiated a withdrawal of the charge.
Charge of criminal harassment (domestic) withdrawn at the Scarborough Courthouse prior to setting a trial date. Mr. H.L. and the complainant were in an eight month relationship. After a falling out, the two broke up but the complainant would not vacate the shared apartment that was leased by H.L. H.L. had allegedly made over 100 calls to the complainant over a period of 24 hours and allegedly banged on the door of the apartment. The complainant called police and H.L. was charged. Defence lawyer Mariya Protsenko reviewed the disclosure and conducted extensive pre-trials with the Crown. Although it was true that H.L. had made the calls there was no evidence of “reasonable” fear. H.L. attended for therapy on issues related to relationships and after a favourable report, the Crown agreed to withdraw the charge.
Charge of Domestic Assault withdrawn prior to trial in Newmarket Court. Ms. J.L. was charged by York Regional Police after allegedly scratching and punching her husband during a domestic dispute at their house. Ms. J.L. called police. Mandarin was her first language and she was not interviewed properly. But she had visible signs of injuries and she complained of fending off an assault from her husband. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger obtained medical records for his client who sustained an injury that required medical attention. In addition, Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger obtained occurrence reports of prior calls to police that established a pattern of aggressive conduct by the complainant – her husband. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger provided the Crown with medical records and the occurrence reports. After extensive pre-trials, the Crown agreed to withdraw the charge.
Charges of assault and threaten death (domestic) withdrawn after extensive discussions with the Crown Attorney. Z.K.L. was allegedly to have grabbed and pushed his wife during a heated argument about the raising of their child. There was also an allegation of a threat. However, Z.K.L. sustained scratch marks on his neck and chest while the complainant sustained no injuries. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger had the injuries photographed and a medical expert examine the injuries who confirmed they were fresh – proximate in time to the alleged assault – and were consistent finger nails as the manner in which the marks were made. The pictures and report were disclosed to the Crown by Joseph Neuberger. The issue became clear that the couple wanted to reconcile and so Joseph Neuberger suggested individualized counselling followed by marital counselling in order to address the reasons for the couples’ arguments. After extensive therapy, all charges were withdrawn.
Charges of Luring x 2 and obtaining the sexual services of someone under 18, withdrawn after extensive pre-trials. E.T. was charged in a York Regional Police sting operation. The police place an ad on the Backpages for an escort of 18 years of age. During texting, the undercover officers indicates that the pretend escort is younger than 18. In this case, the officer sent a single text to E.T. and there was no direct reply by E.T. There was no confirmation or acknowledgement by E.T. of the alleged age. Joseph Neuberger conducted extensive legal research and had several pre-trials and a judicial pre-trial. Joseph Neuberger argued that the Crown must establish that the accused knew the age and although it could be inferred, there was no evidence from the text messages that gave any evidence that E.T. had actually read the text. Further, Joseph Neuberger argued that the timing of the text with the age overlapped in time with a text sent by E.T. and he thus may not have seen the text with the age. As a result, the Crown withdrew the charge.
Charges of domestic assault and threaten death withdrawn after extensive pre-trial negotiations. The complainant informed N.G. that she wanted a divorce. N.G. then said that he would seek custody of the children. Within two days of that discussion, N.G. was charged by police with two domestic related offences. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger obtained material from the family court and utilized the pleadings of the complainant to establish to the Crown inconsistencies between the complainant’s statement to police and her pleadings in Family court. Based on the material provided by the defence, the Crown agreed to withdraw the charges if the client were to sign a common law peace bond. As such, the client signed a common law peace bond, and the charges were withdrawn.
Charge of domestic assault withdrawn after pre-trial discussions with the Crown. The complainant and Ms. R.A. had been married for about two years. The marriage was having difficulties due to ongoing pressure from both of their careers and poor communication. Unfortunately the two had a heated argument which allegedly escalated to a physical altercation. The complainant allegedly sustained scratch marks to his chest and neck. The complainant called police. When police attended both the complainant and R.A. provided statements. As a result, both the complainant and R.A. were charged with assault. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger obtained from R.A.’s physician medical records detailing injuries well prior to this occurrence that were a result of prior abuse. Joseph Neuberger sent R.A. for private counselling. A report was furnished to the Crown along with a copy of the medical records and as a result the Crown subsequently withdrew the charge of domestic assault.
A three year odyssey successfully concluded for this client after charges of Sexual Assault x 2, Assault x 3 and Threaten Death stayed just prior to the commencement of a two week jury trial. H.B.S. was married for approximately ten years to the complainant. Unfortunately, around year eight of the marriage, the relationship soured and H.B.S. had been talking about a divorce. Prior to the marriage, the complainant signed a marriage contract that limited support and division of property upon a divorce. Ultimately, in April of 2012 the two separated but continued to live in the matrimonial home. In May of 2012, police were called to the home for a domestic incident during which H.B.S. was charged with grabbing his wife’s arm during a verbal argument. There was a small red mark on her arm. When the complainant attended the police station and provided a video statement, the complainant gave information about historical sexual assault allegations and other assaults. H.B.S. was charged with various offences including two serious sexual assault charges. Joseph Neuberger was retained by H.B.S. Joseph Neuberger obtained all of the family court documents, a copy of the marriage contract, and documents related to the complainant’s prior marriage and divorce. In addition, Joseph Neuberger obtained from the client various pieces of evidence, including emails, cards, pictures, a copy of the wedding video, plus numerous other related material for the purposes of cross-examination and to contradict the complainant’s version of the marriage. At the preliminary hearing, Joseph Neuberger, extensively and in a detailed fashion, cross-examined the complainant. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger obtained an admission from the complainant that in the divorce proceedings she was seeking to set aside the marriage contract partially due to the fact that she was alleging in an abusive relationship with H.B.S. prior to marriage and prior to signing the marriage contract. Thus, a conviction in the criminal case would bolster her case in the family court to set aside the marriage contract and the complainant could then gain over $2,000,000.00. There were numerous other inconsistencies raised by the defence including that both alleged brutal sexual assaults left NO injuries, yet in May of 2012 when she called the police, a red mark was found on her arm because the complainant stated that she “bruised easily.” Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger further established that an alleged assault from 2002, supposedly witnesses by her sister, was not reliable. In fact, the complainant had written out the statement of her sister and Joseph Neuberger alleged that there was obvious collusion. Joseph Neuberger disclosed additional defence evidence to the Crown and continually argued that there was no reasonable prospect of conviction. Finally, just before the commencement of the jury trial, the Crown stayed all charges.
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.
