Criminal Cases won by Anser Farooq

This section is designated to give you an understanding of some of my cases. The names and other information about my clients have been hidden in order to protect thier privacy and confidentiality.

Accessory First Degree Murder - Section 240 -

Attempt Murder - Section 239 -

Dangerous Operation Causing Death – Section 249(4)-

Obstruct Police & Fail To Comply – Section 139 C.C.C. & 733 C.C.C. -
Possession Stolen Property – Section 354 C.C.C.. -
Sexual Assault & Sexual Interference – Section 271 C.C.C. & Section 151 C.C.C -

Stolen Vehicle. – Section 334 & 335 -

Terrorism – Section 83 C.C.C. -








Accessory First Degree Murder - Section 240

Trial Pending

‘A' is charged with accessory to first-degree murder along with two other individuals who are charged with first-degree murder. This case is currently before the Court.



 






Assault and Mischief – Section 265(1) & 430(1)
Elated
‘A’s charged with Assault and Mischief due to an alleged fight with his girlfriend. Mr. Farooq diligently prepared ‘A’ for the trial. The Court found no reason to disbelieve ‘A’ and found him innocent of all charges. ‘A’ was elated.







Attempt Murder - Section 239

Charges Averted

‘A' was wanted for questioning by the police for a shooting that resulted in a number of people being charged with attempt murder. ‘A's' father knew of Mr. Farooq and retained his services to ensure his son did not get charged. Mr. Farooq's able assistance ensured that ‘A' did not get charged with any offence.








Dangerous Operation Causing Death – Section 249(4)
Release from Police Station

‘A' was detained for questioning by the police after an anonymous person alleged he saw ‘A' drive the vehicle that struck and killed a woman. Fortunately, ‘A' knew Mr. Farooq and contacted him to assist. Mr. Farooq attended the police station immediately and secured ‘A's' release. The officer in charge was told that he lacked reasonable and probable grounds for detention. At the conclusion of a three-month investigation ‘A' was not charged with any offence.









Fraud $1.1 Million – Section 380(1)(a) C.C.C.
Exceptional and outstanding result
‘A’ was charged with 159 counts of Fraud totalling 1.1 million dollars. The crown wanted 2 years jail before trial and 5 after trial.
Mr. Farooq started the trial and on the 4th day of a 2-month long trial; the Crown agreed to withdraw 158 counts of Fraud. ‘A’ plead guilty to one count of Fraud in the amount of $105,000.00.
Most significantly, the Crown argued for 2 years jail but Mr. Farooq’s persistence and diligence resulted in ‘A’ receiving no jail time.







Fraud $152,000.00 – Section 380(1)(a) C.C.C.
Exceptional result
‘A’ confessed to the police that she defrauded her employer of $152,000.00 She was charged with Fraud Over 5000 and the Crown wanted her in jail for one year.
During sentencing Mr. Farooq argued that ‘A’ should not have to pay back any money or serve any jail time; the judge agreed.
The Judge positively acknowledged Mr. Farooq’s work in providing informative case law to reach his decision.








Fraud Over & Obstruction of Justice – Section 380(1)(a) & 139(1) C.C.C.
The defendant was a victim
‘A’, a businessman was charged with insurance fraud and obstruction of justice. He was dissatisfied with his counsel and retained Mr. Farooq to take over. The Crown was seeking two years jail.
The trial lasted 4 days and the Judge found ‘A’ innocent finding that ‘A’ was a victim.









Impaired Driving and Over 80 – Section 253(a) & 253 (b)
Charges withdrawn
‘A’ was charged with Over 80 and Impaired Driving. He wanted to plead guilty and get things over with.
‘A’ met with and retained Mr. Farooq. Mr. Farooq worked diligently on his case.
‘A’ received an early Christmas present; his charges were withdrawn.








Impaired Driving and Over 80 – Section 253(a) & 253 (b)
Fell on his knees and thanked God
‘A’ was charges with Over 80 and Impaired Driving.
‘A’ insisted he was targeted because he was black and that the two Caucasian security guards falsely accused him.
Mr. Farooq thoroughly prepared the case. At trial the judge found ‘A’ innocent of all charges.









Indecent Act – Section 173(1) C.C.C.
Charges Withdrawn
A young man facing the prospect of a conviction for allegedly exposing himself to a woman in public was desperate to clear his name. Mr. Farooq’s experienced approach to the case convinced the Crown to withdraw the charges.








Indecent Act – Section 173(1) C.C.C.
Career Saved
‘A’, a health care worker was charged with indecent exposure and a conviction would cause irreparable harm to his career. The prospect of a change in career was not acceptable to ‘A.
‘A’s’ faith in Mr. Farooq was well placed and at trial the Judge found ‘A’ not guilty. A was jubilant at the result.






Manslaughter - Section 236 C.C.C.
Extremely relieved and grateful
‘A’ was a University student when he was charged with Manslaughter and was facing up to 15 years of jail time. He was dissatisfied with his counsel and retained Mr. Farooq to take over.
Mr. Farooq brought a motion to quash a subpoena; prepared motion for abuse of process and unreasonable delay. The Crown finally withdrew the charge.
A was extremely relieved and grateful. More significantly Mr. Farooq ensured that ‘A’s University education was minimally impacted.







Obstruct Police & Fail To Comply – Section 139 C.C.C. & 733 C.C.C.

Start A New Family

‘H.F.' was charged with obstructing a police office and fail to comply. He was facing 6months in jail. His plans to start a new family came to a sudden halt. Mr. Farooq sought have the charges dismissed and filed a motion with the Court in Barrie , Ontario. On the trial date, the Crown agreed to withdraw both charges. ‘H.H.' was elated and free to purse his dream of starting a new family.








Possession Stolen Property – Section 354 C.C.C

Career In Law Enforcement Saved

‘M.S.‘ worked as a security officer at an airport and found himself charged with an offence of possessing stolen property. A conviction would lead to the loss of not only his current job but would serve as a bar to his career as a security officer.

Mr. Farooq took the case and charges against ‘M.S.' were withdrawn.








Sexual Assault – Section 271 C.C.C.
No Jail
‘A’ was charged for sexually assaulting a minor. He was dissatisfied with his counsel and retained Mr. Farooq to take over. The Crown sought two years jail at the commencement of trial.
On day one of the trial Mr. Farooq posed legal questions that proved difficult for the Crown to answer. The Crown had to reassess its case and consequently ‘A’ was offered a plea with no jail time.






Sexual Assault & Sexual Interference – Section 271 C.C.C. & Section 151 C.C.C.

Life Back To Normal

‘ S.S.' was charged with sexual assault and sexual interference of a 9-year-old girl. He was in custody until his family was able to secure his release through advice provided by Mr. Farooq.

The case was scheduled for a three-day trial a year from S.S.'s release.

Mr. Farooq's diligent and meticulous preparation for trial exposed numerous inconsistencies in the Crown's case. The Crown reconsidered prosecution and concluded there was no reasonable prospect of conviction.

Charges against S.S. were withdrawn two months before his trial was to commence. ‘S.S.' was relieved to get his life back to normal.









Stolen Vehicle. – Section 334 & 335
Grateful Parents

‘A' a young person was arrested by the police for being a passenger in a stolen vehicle. ‘A's' parent's attended the police station with their son and were told to leave. The parents notified Mr. Farooq. Mr. Farooq immediately attended the police station and secured the release of ‘A'. Mr. Frooq's timely intervention ensured that no charges were laid against ‘A'.







Terrorism – Section 83 C.C.C.

 

‘A.B.' was charged with terrorism related offences. Seventeen others were also charged on similar offences. The family was devastated and was critical to the case that A.B. be released on bail pending trial. Mr. Farooq was able to secure the release of ‘A.B.'

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060825.waboud25/BNStory/National

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/06/03/suspects060603.html








Theft Under 5000 – Section 334(b) C.C.C.
Grateful
‘A’ and ‘B’ were charges with Theft Under 5000 cc.
Mr. Farooq brought a Charter Motion and was successful in having the charges against both ‘A’ and ‘B’ stayed.
‘A’ and ‘B’ were grateful.