(02) 8606 2218
About Us
Share This Article
Our client is a 55-Year-old Mother, who resides in Rouse hill and works as a schoolteacher. She has been in a loving relationship with her husband for over 32 years. One afternoon her and her husband got into a dispute and police were called, when police arrived, they interviewed her husband while he was in an emotional state and he made a multitude of improper and swayed statements to police which led to police placing our client under arrest and placing her on a Apprehended Domestic Violence Order.
Police intended on relying upon this video evidence to finalise the AVO against our client notwithstanding that her husband did not want the AVO to be in place and made numerous attempts to have it withdrawn.
Our client contacted CDLA and spoke to our criminal lawyer Alex Istifan who provided her with advice and guidance. Amongst the advice she was advised on her options to make an informed decision on how to get rid of this AVO which if finalised would potentially lead to the loss of her job as a teacher due to the associated implications of having a AVO and applying for a working with children’s check.
In the lead up to the Hearing at Blacktown Court, our client worked with our lawyer Alex Istifan who carefully drafted a statement in response to the police evidence clearly highlighting the issues within the police case both factually and legally in an attempt to get the AVO dismissed early.
Mr. Istifan then continued to persistently negotiate with police for weeks following prior to the hearing day.
On the day of hearing in court, our Alex spoke to prosecution again and made further attempts at convincing them to drop the AVO given the holes in the prosecution case based on the police evidence so far.
Thanks for our Alex determination and persistence, the police prosecutor stood up in open court and informed His Honour that the matter was no longer pursued by police and was to be withdrawn leading to His Honour ordering that the AVO be dismissed.
This was a great result as it meant that our client could not only continue her relationship with her husband of 32 years restriction free but she could also maintain her employment as a teacher and move on.
Print
