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
Charge of sexual assault withdrawn in the Ontario Court of Justice. The client was charged with having allegedly lured a woman into his home under the pretense of a job as a nanny. During the interview, the complainant alleged that she was sexually assaulted. Investigation by Defence Lawyer Joseph Neuberger in the social media postings of the complainant established that she was never looking for any position as a nanny but had been made statements contrary to what she alleged to police. In addition, statements taken by the defence from the security staff at the building where the client resided indicated that when the complainant attended she was dressed not appropriately for an interview and when leaving was in a happy mood asking them to order her a taxi. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger also had the client undergo a forensic psycho-sexual assessment to show that he was and is of low to no risk to females. As such, the charge was withdrawn.
Client was charged with various sexual assault allegations made by 2 female family members that were historical in nature and spanned a lengthy time period. After a 4 day trial and extensive cross-examination of the Complainants by lawyer Stacey Nichols, as well as presentation of Defence evidence of other family members which refuted the Complainant’s allegations, client was acquitted of all charges in the Ontario Court of Justice.
Charge of domestic assault withdrawn prior to setting trial date. The complainant during the course of a bitter divorce alleged that at an exchange of their child under the interim custody arrangement, A.G. assaulted her while she was holding the child. Fortunately, defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger was able to track down two civilian witnesses who provided statements that the complainant was acting in a highly belligerent and volatile state. In addition, recordings of the compliant made during arguments with the A.G. were turned over to the Crown to establish the aggressive nature of the complainant’s interaction with A.G. After extensive pre-trials, the Crown withdrew the charge on the basis of no reasonable prospect of conviction.
Charges of domestic assault x 2 withdrawn at trial in the Ontario Court of Justice, Hamilton. Client was charged by his girlfriend with having assaulted her on at least two occasions. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger carefully constructed a cross-examination based on numerous subtle, but important, inconsistencies and drafted a chart of these inconsistencies based upon her statement, occurrence reports and her 911 call. In addition Joseph Neuberger obtained statements from two witnesses in relation to a subsequent occurrence in order to establish that she fabricated a further allegation of breach of K.M’s bail. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger provided the Crown with a detailed chart of all of the inconsistencies, details as to her motive to lie and a draft of the cross-examination. As a result, the Crown assessed the case and determined that there was no reasonable prospect of conviction. As such, both charges were withdrawn.
Charges of sexual assault and threatening harm withdrawn in the Ontario Court of Justice, Toronto. The client was a young person alleged to have engaged in “bullying” activity including a sexual assault and threatening of the complainant while at school. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger critically assessed the statement of the complainant along with the statements of a number of witnesses, and then obtained statements from teachers and other witnesses in relation to the actions and behaviors of the complainant. Joseph Neuberger provided the Crown with an extensive package of statements and a detailed letter outlining why the complainant lacked credibility and why there was no reasonable prospect of conviction. After several pre-trial discussions with the assigned Crown, the charges were withdrawn on the basis of no reasonable prospect of conviction.
Charge of domestic assault withdrawn prior to trial. R.C. was charged with allegedly assaulted his girlfriend after she accused him of cheating on her. After the charge was laid the complainant continued to text and communicate with R.C. and demand funds for some alleged debt that he owed. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger obtained from the client all of the communications and further had statements taken from individuals who the complainant had spoken to about the allegations and made disparaging remarks and contradictory remarks about the allegations. Joseph Neuberger put together a defence disclosure package of all the communications and statements and provided same to the crown attorney. After extensive discussions, the Crown concluded that the complainant had no credibility and that there may have been financial motivation and a revenge aspect to the allegation in the first place. As such, the charge was withdrawn.
Client found not guilty of charges of domestic assault and forcible confinement after trial. R.M. was alleged to have forced his ex-girlfriend into his house, locked the doors and held her against the door while arguing with her about the demise of their relationship. During this alleged altercation, R.M. was injured and the complainant sustained no injuries. After Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger extensively cross-examined the complainant, Joseph Neuberger was able to establish that R.M., after having been struck and started to bleed, told the complainant that he was going to call police and asked the complainant to leave. It was after this that the complainant first called police and did so while remaining on R.M.”s porch, which under cross-examined was used to show that the complainant was not fearful (otherwise she would have sought refuge in her car or some other safe location) and instead contacted police in order to pre-empt her from being charged for having assaulted R.M. Other significant factors were raised during cross-examination that undermined the complainant’s version of events. R.M. was well prepared by Joseph Neuberger and testified in a straightforward and believable manner. As such, the trial judge found R.M. credible and R.M. was found not guilty of both charges.
The Appellant was convicted at trial of Assault and Assault With a Weapon as a result of an altercation during a domestic dispute when a baseball bat was thrown. In the Court of Appeal, lawyer successfully argued that the conduct proven by the Crown did not amount to an assault. The Ontario Court of Appeal accepted this argument and the Appellant’s convictions for Assault and Assault with a Weapon were overturned and an acquittal entered.
Client charged with alleged sexually assaulting his wife, withdrawn mid-way through the preliminary hearing. Defence counsel Joseph Neuberger cross-examined the complainant on important inconsistencies between her 911 call and the statements she provided to police. Mr. Neuberger was able to establish that there were financial motivations to the complainant making the allegation of sexual assault and in fact the translated statement, as the original statement was in Punjabi, was not accurate which gave rise to the inherent unreliability of her initial allegations. After extensive discussions, the Crown determined that there was no reasonable prospect of conviction.
Charges of sexual assault and domestic assault withdrawn prior to setting date for trial. The client was alleged to have sexually assaulted his girlfriend while in a hotel and when she fled grabbed her by the hair and pulled her back to the room. Defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger was able to have the complainant re-interviewed during which the complainant recanted the allegation and also confirmed her state of high intoxication. The defence obtained copies of her bar tab establishing that the complainant had consumed a large volume of alcohol close in time to the alleged sexual assault. Further, an independent witness who allegedly observed the grabbing of the hair, was inconsistent in his statement, and was contradicted in his timing given the re-interview of the complainant. After extensive pre-trial discussions with the Crown, the client agreed to attend an expert retained by defence lawyer Joseph Neuberger for counselling and after completion of 12 sessions, the client signed a peace bond and all charges were withdrawn
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.
