← More Recent Successes success stories

Client found not guilty of Sexual Assault after a four-day trial in the Ontario Court of Justice, Toronto. M.A. had met the complainant at Cherry Beach and the two exchanged Instagram handles. After some time of exchanges message, the two decided to go on a date. The location picked by M.A. was a restaurant that served alcohol, and the complainant for some reason did not want to go. Eventually the two went back to M.A.’s condo and had Sisha on the balcony. As the evening progressed the two wound up on M.A.’s bedroom and the two had intimate contact. The complainant left angry and contacted police two days later. M.A. was charged with sex assault. Joseph Neuberger, Criminal Defence Lawyer Toronto, to defend M.A. After receiving the disclosure, Joseph Neuberger and Diana Davison obtained a series of messages exchanged between M.A. and the complainant. The Crown was going to use the messages to establish a plan that M.A. sought to execute to manipulate the complainant to not go out but to come to his home for sex. Aside from this being a male sexual aggression stereotype, the messages when put into context showed mutual flirting, and a determined intention of the complainant to arrange date at M.A.’s home to have Shisha on his balcony. Further, the complainant provided a second statement that seemed to contradict the first statement on how the sexual encounter unfolded. At trial, cross-examination lasted the better part of two days wherein the complainant was shown to have serious internal inconsistencies in her evidence and made crucial admissions including that she was telling M.A. that she was “close” and climaxed. This came out under intense cross-examination and were two piece of important information the complainant intentionally left out of both of her two police statements. This was in stark contrast to her evidence in-chief during which she stated that she was not enjoying any part of the evening, and during sexual activity was in pain and had blacked out. In cross-examination she admitted to making a false statement about a particular sex act, then eventually agreed she willingly went to M.A.’s bedroom and was kissing him passionately. As noted above, with further pressure on cross-examination by Joseph Neuberger the complainant made the two major admissions. In addition, the defence spent time with the client getting him ready to testify. At trial the Court accepted much of his evidence as being consistent and more plausible. When the Court considered all of the evidence, M.A. was found not guilty of sexual assault.