Our client is a 35-year old registered nurse and recently became a mother.
She was charged with Larceny (‘stealing’) and shoplifting.
Police alleged that our client attended various high-end retail stores to steal items.
She was captured on CCTV removing the price labels from various clothing items and placing them inside her handbag before leaving the store without paying.
On one such occasion she was stopped by security at a Myer store and items were discovered in her handbag. Police were called and she was subsequently charged.
Significantly, she had enough money to pay for the items and offered to pay for them after she was caught.
She came to us distraught and concerned about the impact this would have on her ability to continue working as a nurse.
Due to our experience, this was a scenario we had seen before. Oftentimes women resort to shoplifting as a coping mechanism for post-natal depression.
We immediately arranged for our client to see a psychologist who specialises in this area.
A report was prepared by the psychologist which confirmed that our client’s offending was due to post-natal depression.
The case proceeded at Downing Centre Local Court where we made an application under Section 32 of the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 for the charges to be dismissed.
The presiding magistrate granted the application and our client was discharged under the section without a finding of guilt.
She is elated to be able to continue her employment.
Our client was a 25-year-old worker at a retail store.
Six months after commencing employment she was charged with Larceny by clerk or servant offence pursuant to Section 156 of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) relating to over $20,000 in stock and cash.
Police alleged that over the course of many months our client had systematically taken stock and cash. These incidents were captured on CCTV.
Our client came to us embarrassed.
We inquired as to what had been happening in her life at the time of these offences. She informed us that her mother had recently passed away and she was the sole carer for her elderly grandparents and two younger siblings.
In light of this, we arranged for her to see one of our expert psychologists for a Section 32 Report to be prepared. The report we received disclosed our client suffered from severe depression and anxiety.
The case proceeded at Burwood Local Court. We made an application under Section 32 of the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act for all of the charges to be dismissed.
The presiding magistrate was persuaded by the leading cases we referred to and dismissed the charges on the proviso that our client completed a treatment plan with the psychologist.
Our client was overjoyed with the result and can continue to financially support her family.
Our client is a 23-year-old man from Sydney’s Western Suburbs.
On one particular night he was in the gambling section at a pub in the city. CCTV footage showed our client looking at an elderly Asian man who had just won $1,000 on a pokies machine.
CCTV footage then showed our client follow the elderly man as he left the pub and walked home. Eventually, our client was seen on CCTV running up from behind the elderly man and striking him down. Our client then rummaged through the victim’s pockets and retrieved the cash from his wallet.
A few days later, in an unrelated incident, our client was evicted from his residence. Feeling aggrieved, our client returned to the residence a few days later and stole a plasma TV as well as an Xbox and some video games. He was captured doing this on the apartment’s CCTV.
Police took over six months to conclude their investigation at which stage they charged our client with Robbery for the taking of the wallet and Enter Dwelling House with Intent for the taking of the TV, Xbox and games.
When Police conducted a search of our client’s apartment they located the TV, Xbox and games. They also discovered a small amount of cannabis.
Our client came to us and advised us he had no memory of stealing the wallet from the elderly man.
However, he acknowledged that he had returned to his residence and taken the items alleged because he was upset at having been evicted.
Significantly, our client advised that at the time of both offences he had been heavily affected by drugs and alcohol.
We immediately arranged for our client to attend a residential rehabilitation program while the case progressed.
We also engaged in negotiations with the Director of Public prosecutions and were able to amend the facts for the Robbery offences so that our client striking the elderly man was amended to a ‘push’.
Further, the ‘Enter Dwelling House with Intent’ and ‘Possess Prohibited Drug’ charges were placed on a ‘Form 1’ which meant our client did not receive a separate sentence for those offences.
At the sentencing Hearing, we tendered significant material including a lengthy psychologist report, a letter from the rehabilitation facility and numerous character references evidencing the change in our client from the time of the offences to now.
Despite the prosecution arguing strongly for a sentence of full-time imprisonment to be imposed, the Judge at Downing Centre District Court sentenced our client to an ‘intensive correction order’ (ie. community service, supervision and counselling – no prison) for a period of 18 months.
Our client and his family were elated with the result.
Get A Free Case EvaluationHave a legal issue? 
Astor Legal
(02) 7804 2823
