Our client was 66 years of age and is retired. His wife and he own a property in which they live in and let out rooms to renters. He was charged with sexual intercourse without consent, with the alleged victim being one of his tenants in his home. The offence sexual intercourse without consent is a strictly indictable offence that carries a maximum term of imprisonment of 14 years, with a standard non-parole period of 7 years. Strictly indictable offences go through a different process in the courts compared to non-strictly indictable offences that can often simply and swiftly be resolved in the Local Court. It is often a lengthier process that involves police serving the brief to us and the matter being referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP). Once referred to the DPP, a charge certificate is prepared, and case conferences take place between the defence and prosecution. The process started with NSW police arresting and charging our client. The matter was first listed in Liverpool Local Court in which our solicitor, Jelena, appeared. As is common for these types of strictly indictable criminal matters, the DPP took carriage of the matter. Our client instructed us that sexual intercourse did take place, but that it was consensual, which became the key issue. Jelena continued to represent our client throughout the entire court process and organised for a barrister to be briefed in the matter. Through the committal process, the matter was eventually set down for a five day trial at Parramatta District Court. The trial took place in Parramatta District Court before a Judge. Towards the end of the prosecution evidence during the trial, there was a procedural fairness issue that arose. An application under section 132 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 was made by us to the court to have a Judge alone trial, which was granted by his Honour. On day five of the trial, Judge McGrath found our client not guilty of the offence sexual intercourse without consent. Our client was very grateful to have avoided a term of imprisonment. All that remained was the Apprehended Domestic Violence Order (ADVO) which NSW police had applied for at the commencement of the proceedings. Jelena appeared again in Liverpool Local Court after the trial was finalised in Parramatta. NSW police agreed to withdraw their application for the ADVO. As a result, Magistrate Abdul-Karim dismissed the police application for the ADVO.

lamont law jelena

Result achieved by

Jelena Dobric

Solicitor · Lamont Law

Jelena is admitted to the Supreme Court of NSW and the High Court of Australia. Jelena practices exclusively in criminal and traffic law. Jelena has degrees in Media and Law from the University of New South Wales.

Other Results