Case Study: Defendant Acquitted of Assault Charges After Exposing Inconsistencies in Officers’ Testimony

The Incident: AsSAULT CHARGES

During a high-speed chase, officers claimed that the suspect vehicle intentionally rammed their police vehicle multiple times. They asserted that they had clearly seen the driver and could personally attest that he was the one driving and that he had deliberately rammed their car.

THE LEGAL BATTLE

Challenging Officers’ Testimony: The Role of Discovery

The suspected driver was charged with two assault charges on a law enforcement officer and two counts of armed criminal action. The defendant consistently maintained that he had not rammed the police car as accused. During discovery, several serious inconsistencies in the officers’ claims were uncovered by the defense.

Exposing Inconsistencies: Undermining Credibility

At trial, the lawyers from James Law Group meticulously highlighted these inconsistencies, casting doubt on the officers’ ability to accurately identify the driver and the alleged intentional ramming. Through thorough cross-examination, they demonstrated that the officers’ testimony could not be trusted beyond a reasonable doubt.

Achieving Justice

A Jury’s Verdict: Not Guilty on All Assault Charges

The compelling evidence presented by the defense led the jury to question the reliability of the officers’ statements. After deliberation, the jury found the defendant not guilty of both counts of assault and both counts of armed criminal action.

MOVING FORWARD

Defending the Accused: The Importance of Diligent Legal Representation

This case underscores the critical importance of skilled legal defense and the thorough examination of all evidence. James Law Group’s dedicated attorneys played a pivotal role in securing justice for the defendant.

Learn more about our attorney’s and how they can advocate for you. Contact James Law Group today.

 

Summary of Assault Charges

During a high-speed chase, officers claimed that the damage caused to their vehicle was caused by the suspect vehicle intentionally ramming the police vehicle multiple times. The two officers further claimed that they had been able to see the driver of the suspect vehicle and could personally attest to the fact that he was driving and that he had intentionally rammed the police car.

The suspected driver was charged with two counts of assault first on a law enforcement officer and two counts of Armed Criminal Action. The defendant maintained that he had not rammed the police car as they had accused him of. During discovery, several serious inconsistencies in the officer’s claims became apparent.

At trial, lawyers for James Law Group were able to show that the officers could not be believed beyond a reasonable doubt about their claims of being assaulted. The Defendant was found not guilt of both assaults and both armed criminal actions by a jury. 

This post is meant to be a guide, not legal advice. please contact us if you need legal advice. our team is happy to help. 

 

PROTECTING YOUR RIGHTS

Trust James Law Group to be your advocates in criminal defense cases. We're here to protect your rights and your recovery.

5 + 6 =