Kitchener and Waterloo Assault Defence Lawyers

In 2022, Donich Law successfully defended an individual charged with uttering death threats, assault with a weapon and assault in R. v. Y.W. [2022]. The client was charged after allegedly threatening his domestic partner with a knife and assaulting her during an argument. Donich Law ultimately secured the withdrawal of all charges by demonstrating that the accused had addressed the underlying issues that led to his arrest. If the offender is willing to do some upfront work, they are more likely to receive consideration from the Crown to drop the charges.

In R. v. S.Y. [2022], the Firm represented an individual arrested for allegedly assaulting their ex-partner while holding a cell phone. The alleged assault led to a simple assault and an assault with a weapon charge being laid against the accused. The Firm secured a withdrawal of both charges after negotiating with the Crown and providing context to the alleged incident. Video evidence was also used to challenge the statement of the complainant. It’s rare to have video surveillance of an assault, depending on the case it can be useful to the defence if not obtained by law enforcement.

In early 2019, the Firm defended an individual charged with assault causing bodily harm in R. v. Z.C. [2019]. After a year of litigation, the Firm was able to secure a discharge for the accused. Later in 2019, the Firm resolved two separate domestic assault matters without criminal charges for either accused in R v. A.V. [2019] and R. v. M.R. [2019]. In both cases, the accused’s were second time offenders. Defending domestic violence offences for second offenders is more difficult because the Crown will likely seek a conviction or jail sentence. Sentencing principles require the court to consider prior interactions with the justice system which increases the probability of jail.

In R. v. R.S. [2016], the Firm defended an individual charged with assault causing bodily harm after allegedly punching another man in the face and breaking his zygomatic bone, requiring three reconstructive surgeries to repair. After three years of litigation the Firm was able to prove that the complainant had been sexually harassing the accused’s girlfriend immediately before the incident. Ultimately, the matter was resolved without a criminal record for the accused. The complainant was very motivated to ensure the accused received a conviction so a judicial pretrial was conducted prior to resolving the matter to obtain judicial input. The complainant may have been motivated, but doesn’t have the final say in the proceeding.

In 2016, the Firm Defended an individual charged with assault with a weapon after throwing her purse at her husband in R. v. P.S. [2016]. The Firm was able to negotiate with the Crown to have the charge withdrawn and proved the complainant was actually exploiting the accused, a new Canadian immigrant. Her fingerprints and photographs were later destroyed which finalized her immigration process. In 2015, the Firm defended a City of Toronto employee charged with assault with a weapon after throwing his keys at his spouse in R. v. P.L. [2015]. The Firm was able to have the charge withdrawn, resolving the matter without a criminal record for the accused. Any object used in the context of a domestic altercation can be treated as a weapon when the police lay charges.

In 2023, the Firm represented a client charged with assault and assault – choking in R. v. J.S. [2023]. The client was arrested and charged after an individual waiting for a bus witnessed the accused get into an altercation with his girlfriend. The witness called police alleging that they had seen the accused grab and choke the complainant. Police attended the scene, and the accused was arrested and charged. After two years of Crown negotiations the Firm secured the withdrawal of the charge.

In 2022, the Firm represented an individual charged with one count of assault after grabbing the arm of a child at the daycare she worked at, cause the child to fall and injure her face in R. v. G.S. [2022]. The Crown’s initial position on sentence involved a period of incarceration. The Firm had the client undergo a formal risk assessment to demonstrate a low risk of recidivism. After two years of pre-trials and negotiations the Firm resolved the matter without a criminal record.

In 2024, the Firm represented a client charged with breach of probation, extortion, and criminal harassment in R. v. A.C. [2024]. The accused was arrested after law enforcement linked his IP address to harassing messages being sent to the complainant over a social media platform. Police got a warrant to search the accused’s home and seized several electronic devices. After a thorough disclosure review, the Firm brought several serious issues with the evidence to the Crown’s attention, and after more than a year of Crown delay, threatened an 11(b) Charter challenge. All charges against the accused were ultimately withdrawn.