Case Summary
Our client was a young man with a significant criminal history who had spent an extended period in custody for a serious offence. Approximately 12 months after his release, he was arrested and remanded in custody in connection with a new firearms allegation.
He was charged with possessing a firearm while being a prohibited person. The shotgun in question had been stolen during a burglary in mid-2023, while our client was still in custody. It was recovered in November 2025, and forensic examination identified two of our client’s fingerprints on the underside of sticky tape attached to the shotgun’s stock.
The fingerprint evidence formed the basis of the allegation against him, despite the limited evidence connecting him to the firearm itself.
The Challenge
The charge was serious and carried the risk of a substantial term of imprisonment. Given the client’s criminal history, the consequences of a conviction were particularly significant.
By the time he was referred to Stary Norton Halphen & Galbally, the client had already spent approximately nine months on remand. It was important to assess the strength of the prosecution’s case and determine whether the available evidence could establish the alleged offence.
Although the fingerprint evidence connected the client to the tape on the shotgun, there were significant questions about the extent to which the available evidence established his possession of the firearm.
In these circumstances, we advised the client to contest the charge rather than accept an outcome without properly challenging the prosecution’s case.
Our Strategy
Jasper MacCuspie’s initial priority was to seek bail and address the weaknesses in the prosecution’s evidence. This was important both to challenge the basis of the allegation and to seek the client’s release after his lengthy period on remand.
The bail application provided an opportunity to bring the evidentiary limitations into focus and require the prosecution’s case to be considered against the seriousness of the charge and the available material.
Bail was granted, allowing the client to return to the community while the proceedings continued. The matter was then listed for a contested hearing.
We continued to challenge the prosecution’s case and pressed for the charge to be withdrawn. Rather than accepting the allegation without a contested hearing, the defence remained prepared to test the evidence in court.
On the day listed for the contested hearing, the prosecution withdrew the charges.
The Result
All charges were withdrawn, and the client received no sentence in relation to the matter.
This was an excellent outcome given the seriousness of the firearms allegation, the potential consequences of a conviction and the client’s criminal history.
The successful bail application had also enabled the client to leave custody while the case was ongoing, rather than remaining on remand until the contested hearing.
The withdrawal of the charges brought the proceedings to an end without a conviction or sentence in this matter.
Why Experience Matters in Criminal Defence
Serious criminal charges require careful scrutiny of the evidence, particularly where the potential penalties are substantial and a client is already in custody.
In this matter, the defence focused on the distinction between the forensic evidence available and whether that evidence was sufficient to establish the alleged possession of a firearm. Seeking bail was also an important early step, given the client’s lengthy time on remand.
Stary Norton Halphen & Galbally has experience defending serious criminal charges, preparing bail applications and contesting allegations where the prosecution evidence requires close examination.
By challenging the evidence, pursuing bail and remaining prepared to proceed to a contested hearing, Jasper MacCuspie helped secure the withdrawal of the charges.
For anyone facing serious criminal allegations, experienced legal representation can help assess the strength of the prosecution’s case, identify evidentiary issues and determine the appropriate strategy for defending the charges.
Disclaimer: The case results featured are real matters handled by our firm. However, every case is different and outcomes vary depending on a range of factors, including the specific facts, circumstances and evidence involved. Past results are not a guarantee of future outcomes and should not be relied upon to predict or determine the result of your matter.