Larceny as a Clerk

Our client was charged with a larceny charge at DFO at Homebush.

After a random search of our client’s bag whilst she was shopping at Burwood Westfields, police found clothing stolen from DFO a few days prior.

The police alleged that our client was the person that stole the clothing from DFO (and escaped from security) and had simply left the clothing in her bag.

Whilst the security tags were still on the clothing, and it appeared it was the same clothing that was stolen, witnesses could not provide police with an accurate description of the offender who actually stole the clothing.

The police could not prove beyond reasonable doubt that it was our client who stole the clothing. The charges were dismissed.

Our client was charged with larceny after having stolen more than $5,000.00 from a faulty deposit box at a bank.

At the time the money was stolen from the deposit box, our client was in the process of depositing money for her own employer.

It became apparent from speaking to the client that she had a long complicated family history with her mother confiscating her wage to gamble since she was a teenager.

The evidence as to her family background was put to the court through a psychological report.

Ultimately, submissions were made that the taking of the property was the impulsive act of a person who had never had financial independence on a account of manipulation by a family member.

The Magistrate accepted, in the circumstances, our client was unlikely to re-offend and dealt with her by way of section 10 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act.

Our client was charged with larceny by clerk, carrying a maximum penalty of 10 years imprisonment. Our client worked as a chef at an exclusive hotel for over 14 years.

Whilst working he took food valued at $70.90 that was nearing the expiration date. The hotel became aware of this and reported it to police.

We assisted our client by representing him throughout the police investigation, court appearances and at the sentencing hearing subsequent to a plea of guilty.

We advised our client that this was a clear case for a section 10. However, a section 10 is always at the Magistrate’s discretion. We therefore prudently went about gathering evidence of our client’s upstanding position in the community and referees who supported our client.

At the sentence hearing in the Downing Centre Local Court the Chief Magistrate Henson was disinclined to order a section 10 due to the position of trust our client was in.

Our solicitor persistently argued to the Court that the circumstances warranted a section 10, including no prior criminal record, the unlikelihood our client would reoffend, our client’s remorse and the additional punishment a conviction would cause in hindering his future employment opportunities.

Eventually after persuasive argument, the Magistrate turned his mind and gave our client a section 10.

Our client now has a greater chance at finding new employment and remains a free man.

Our client was a Mexican Tourist charged with Larceny. He pleaded guilty to stealing an expensive pair of Armani Sunglasses.

When our client was arrested the Police seized almost $5,000.00 in cash without reasonable grounds and without recording the money in the property docket given to our client. Effectively our client had no proof the Police had his money.

Our solicitor requested the Police review their CCTV footage which proved the Police had taken the money as an exhibit. Our solicitor attended the Police Station and successfully pressured the Police to return the money.

The sentence hearing took place at Waverley Local Court before Her Honour Magistrate Sullivan. In light of our client’s good character, evidence of his remorse and the return of the sunglasses on the sentence date, Her Honour dealt with our client by way of a section 10(1)(b) bond for 12 months.

This was a great result for our client who was free to return to Mexico with all his money.