Sexual Assault Charges Dismissed After Trial Acquits Client
R. v. C.F. (2009 Provincial Court)
After a 9-day trial in Provincial Court in which Client charged with a media high-profile sexual assault near a Vancouver Skytrain Station, Vancouver Criminal Defense Lawyer Emmet J. Duncan was SUCCESSFUL in persuading the trial judge that the Crown evidence was INSUFFICIENT to support a conviction. The case involved forensic video evidence; surveillance evidence; and the testimony of numerous eye witnesses whom Mr. Duncan cross-examined. Client ACQUITTED.
CHARGES OF PROCUREMENT DROPPED – NO CRIMINAL RECORD
R. v. P.C. (BC Provincial Court)
Client lost contact with his first lawyer and had a warrant for his arrest weeks before the start of a long trial in which he was charged with acting as a “pimp” and procuring two women to enter into the sex trade. Vancouver Criminal Defense Lawyer Emmet J. Duncan successfully argued that Client should NOT go to jail on the warrant and instead should be permitted to FIGHT THE CHARGE as a free man. On the first day of the trial the Crown DROPPED ALL CHARGES. Client faces NO JAIL and receives NO CRIMINAL RECORD
HISTORICAL SEXUAL ASSAULT – NOT GUILTY, CLIENT ACQUITTED
R. v. H.J. (2010 B.C. Provincial Court)
Client accused of molesting a child that used to live in the same apartment complex. Alleged victim waited at least 10 years to make the allegations. Client steadfastly denied any wrongdoing at any time whatsoever. Vancouver Criminal Lawyer Emmet J. Duncan disclosed Client’s defences and weaknesses in Crown case to prosecutors for more than one year before Trial, but Crown refused to drop charges. Client instructed Mr. Duncan to defend the charges in Court. Crown called alleged victim and mother to testify and they were vigorously cross-examined by Vancouver Criminal Lawyer Emmet J. Duncan. Client then testified. Within 15 minutes of Crown counsel cross-examination of Client, Crown counsel invited the Court to acquit Client on the basis that it would be unsafe and unjust to convict Client. Trial Judge agreed that the Crown had not proved the case and Client was found NOT GUILTY, and charges were DISMISSED.
Sexual Assault Investigation – NO CHARGES LAID
Client received allegation from Police that he had been involved in inappropriate sexual behaviour with daughter some years ago. Client steadfastly denied any wrongdoing. Vancouver Criminal Lawyer Emmet J. Duncan represented Client throughout the process in dealing with police and drawing attention of the police to the inherent weaknesses and flaws in the complainant’s account. Police eventually agreed and closed the investigation with NO CHARGES. Client CLEARED with NO CHARGES, NO ARREST, NO CRIMINAL RECORD.
Client arrested in a “Vice Sting” in which Client communicated for a sexual purpose with an undercover police officer. Upon arrest, Client was searched and police located a quantity of cocaine in Client’s possession. Police arrested Client for Solicitation and for Possession of Cocaine. Vancouver Criminal Lawyer Emmet J. Duncan persuaded provincial and federal crown counsel that the circumstances of the evening were exceptional in that Client was facing extreme personal problems just before the Christmas season. The Client’s behaviour and decision-making was out-of-the-ordinary and did not affect the Client’s character. Crown counsel agreed to refer the matter for alternative measures INSTEAD of laying charges, as the police had requested. Client successfully completed diversion and there were NO CHARGES; NO JAIL and NO CRIMINAL RECORD.
Allegations of Historical Sexual Assault and Sexual Touching – Acquittal After Trial
R. v. T.A.D. (2011 B.C. Supreme Court)
Client accused of sexually assaulting and molesting 7 or 8 year child first as a neighbour and then as a sometime-babysitter. Client absolutely denied all allegations. Vancouver Criminal Defence Lawyer Emmet J. Duncan conducted a nine day Trial on behalf of his Client, plus brought an application for the complainant’s medical and counseling records. After cross-examining two police officers, two counselors, the complainant and her two parents, Mr. Duncan called the Client to testify. The Supreme Court Justice found that the Complainant’s story was too vague and missing enough important details that it caused him serious concerns. The Judge found that the Client’s testimony was thoughtful, responsive, and on the whole very credible. Client acquitted and totally cleared – Client receives NO jail time and NO criminal record.