Domestic Violence Intimidation Charges and ADVO Dismissed After Defended Hearing

Case Background: Client Faced Serious DV Allegations and Was Refused Bail

Our client was charged with two counts of intimidation arising from domestic violence allegations. The claims included threats to harm and kill the complainant, who was a law enforcement officer.

From the beginning, the matter was treated at a high level of seriousness. Police refused bail and obtained an interim Apprehended Domestic Violence Order (ADVO). The interim order included strict conditions preventing the client from having any contact with his two young children.

For someone with no prior criminal history, the impact was immediate and severe. He was suddenly facing criminal proceedings, separated from his children, and subjected to restrictions that affected every part of his daily life.

He consistently denied the allegations and maintained his innocence. The matter proceeded on a not guilty basis and was ultimately listed for a defended hearing.

‍

Relevant Laws

The offence of Intimidation is governed by section 13(1) of the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW).

It carries a maximum penalty of:

• 5 years imprisonment;
• A fine of 50 penalty units ($5,500); or
• Both.

In domestic violence matters, courts are also required to consider whether an Apprehended Domestic Violence Order should be made. Under section 39 of the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007, a final ADVO is commonly made following a conviction, and it typically remains in place for two years.

Orders of this nature can have lasting impacts on family relationships, employment, and future legal proceedings.

‍

Building the Defence Required Early, Detailed Preparation

Our Special Counsel Ernest Chan had carriage of the matter from the beginning through to the defended hearing.

From the first conference, the focus was on ensuring the client understood the process and what would be required to properly test the prosecution case. Given the nature of the allegations and the complainant’s role, it was clear the matter would turn heavily on credibility and the quality of the surrounding evidence.

As the brief was served in stages, Ernest undertook a careful review of the material as it became available. A significant volume of additional evidence was only served shortly before the hearing, which required rapid but detailed analysis.

Drawing on his background as a former senior police prosecutor with the NSW Police Force, Ernest examined the prosecution case closely, including:

• The complainant’s Domestic Violence Evidence in Chief (DVEC) interview;
• The Electronically Recorded Interview with Suspected Person (ERISP);
• Police statements;
• Body worn video footage;
• Text message communications; and
• Other documentary and evidentiary material relied upon by police.

That review revealed a number of inconsistencies in the prosecution case when compared against the objective material.

Several conferences were held with the client to ensure the defence was properly prepared and every aspect of the allegations was addressed. Where necessary, key defence material was also obtained and translated by an accredited translator.

‍

At Hearing, the Prosecution Case Was Tested in Full

The matter proceeded to a defended hearing before the Court and ran over the course of a full day.

The defence challenged the reliability of the allegations and carefully examined the prosecution evidence in detail, particularly around inconsistencies in the complainant’s account.

After hearing all of the evidence, the Judge was not satisfied that the complainant was a credible witness. Both criminal charges were dismissed.

Despite the prosecution continuing to seek a final ADVO, the Court also refused to make the order.

‍

The Outcome: Both the Charges and ADVO Were Dismissed

As a result, the client avoided:

• A criminal conviction;
• A potential term of imprisonment;
• A final ADVO; and
• Ongoing restrictions preventing contact with his children.

Following the successful outcome for the client at court, a successful application was made on behalf of the client to have his fingerprints, palm prints and photographs destroyed.

The outcome allowed the client to move forward without the long-term consequences that often follow domestic violence allegations.

This case highlights the importance of early preparation, careful scrutiny of prosecution material, and experienced advocacy in matters where credibility is central to the outcome.