Anastasia Qvist is an outstanding lawyer. My criminal law situation (family violence order) was difficult, complex and Ana's diligence saved me as I was going through the most difficult period of my life. Ana is down to earth, commonsense and she even kept our costs to a minimum. She is a skilled litigator and knows the ins and outs of the ACT Magistrates Court. She dealt skillfully with the DPP and is an excellent negotiator. You will get a fair representation and she genuinely cares about her clients. She has my complete recommendation. The lady goes to bat for her clients.
I would strongly recommend Anastasia to anyone who is seeking legal representation. As a first-time offender who was charged with a Level 2 Drink Driving offence, she walked me through every step of the matter and was very upfront and clear on all aspects of my case. She was always accessible when I needed advice. Her approach and advice were excellent. Under her representation, I received the best possible outcome and managed to avoid a criminal conviction. She was a pleasure to deal with throughout the whole matter.
Anastasia Qvist was very professional and helpful in every step of my matter. I got a very good outcome and I can’t thank you enough for your hard work and the Armstrong Legal team in Canberra. I would highly recommend her!!!
Throughout Angela has been the consummate professional. She maintained a calm, yet strong demeanour remained informative and completely open in her communication and took complete ownership of the situation. We felt confident we finally had an advocate to steer us out of the nightmare we were in, and she did so with great respect and sincerity. I cannot speak more highly of Angela. She has literally rescued our family from what looked very much like a hopeless future.
Words can’t describe how grateful I am to Trudie Cameron being my solicitor and to Andrew Tiedt presenting my case in the court. They both have been very supportive and amazingly professional and effective. I’ve got an absolutely fantastic outcome I couldn’t even dream about.
Soon after meeting Andrew I knew he was the solicitor I wanted to handle my matter. He immediately sprang into action which brought me stability and hope during a tumultuous time in my life. Andrew was never afraid to give me straight answers to my tough questions which is a true mark of integrity. He is clearly at ease in the court environment and I believe his calm and measured demeanour went a long way to helping me secure the best result from my day in court. I would certainly recommend you approach Andrew if you need assistance.
"Andrew Tiedt was very professional and considerate to personal circumstances and gave sound advice that resulted in the best outcome possible. Highly recommended."
Affray, Riot and Violent Disorder (NSW)
In New South Wales, the offences of affray, riot and violent disorder involve violent conduct towards other people, or property, where the offender deliberately causes, or intends to cause, injury or damage to someone. The victim does not actually have to be harmed by the accused but only needs to feel as though their personal safety is at risk. These offences can attract serious penalties.
The offence of affray occurs when a person uses, or threaten to use, unlawful violence towards another person, and where the accused’s conduct would cause an ordinary person to fear for their safety. The offence of affray is contained in section 93C of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW).
If a person is found guilty of affray they are liable to up to 10 years imprisonment if dealt with by the District Court or a maximum of two years imprisonment if dealt with by the Local Court.
What must be proven?
A person is guilty of affray if they deliberately use, or threaten to use, unlawful violence against another person, which causes a person, or people, present to fear for their personal safety. Verbal threats alone are not enough. To constitute an affray, two or more people only need to be present and their conduct is taken into consideration both individually and collectively to determine the severity of the offence.
An example of an affray is a mass gathering of people who become violent in a public place and an onlooker believes their personal safety is at risk. That person does not necessarily have to be present at the scene for the charge to be laid.
A riot involves 12 or more people (a riot group) who are collectively using or threatening unlawful violence, and their conduct would cause fear for the personal safety of other people present. Riot falls under section 93B of the Crimes Act 1900.
A riot may occur in a public or private place. The riot group must all be present at the scene. It is not relevant whether or not the members of the riot group threaten unlawful violence simultaneously.
A person is guilty of riot only if the person intends to use violence or is aware that his or her conduct may be violent. If a person is found guilty of riot they may be liable to 15 years imprisonment if dealt with by the District Court or a maximum of two years imprisonment if dealt with by the Local Court.
The offence of violent disorder is governed by section 11A of the Summary Offences Act 1988. The offence occurs when three or more people are using or threatening unlawful violence, and their conduct, as a group, would cause fear for the personal safety of other people present. The three or more offenders must be present at the scene; however, the victim need not be present.
An example of violent disorder would be damaging a vehicle with a baseball bat where the actions of the accused cause fear for the personal safety of another person.
If a person is found guilty of violent disorder they may be liable to up to 6 months imprisonment or a $1100 fine.
Defences available to Affray and Public violence offences
The defence of self-defence is the most common defence used in a charge of affray and public violence offences. For this defence to succeed, the accused would have to show that their actions were committed out of genuine fear for their personal safety and that they acted proportionately in the circumstances.
It also may be possible to mount a defence based on ‘necessity’ or ‘compulsion’, i.e. the accused’s involvement in the affray or public violence offence was the result of another consideration and that their actions were necessary to prevent greater harm from occurring.
The defence of duress (though rare) could also be argued to defend a charge of affray or public violence. This is when the accused argues that they were compelled to carry out the act that makes up the offence in response to an immediate threat to their life or of serious harm to themselves or another person and that the act was only carried out to avoid the threat of serious harm being carried out.
If you require legal advice or representation in any legal matter, please contact Armstrong Legal.
WHERE TO NEXT?
If you suspect that you may be under investigation, or if you have been charged with an offence, it is vital to get competent legal advice as early as possible. Our lawyers are highly specialised in criminal law and will be able to guide you through the process while dealing with the various authorities related to your matter.
WHY CHOOSE ARMSTRONG LEGAL?
201 Elizabeth Street
Sydney NSW 2000
575 Bourke Street
Melbourne VIC 3000
231 North Quay
Brisbane QLD 4000
1 Farrell Place
Canberra ACT 2601
111 St Georges Terrace
Perth WA 6000