People v. S.Q.
Two females had alleged they had been “peeped-on” by their employer while in the women’s bathroom of the business they worked in. Both females described in great detail two separate occasions where they reported their experiences to the police. Shortly afterward, the officers made contact with the employer to investigate the case. They presented details of the allegations and described what was at stake. Providing an opportunity to the owner to explain himself, the detectives documented the man’s side of the story and followed-up with the original complaining parties.
Once the investigation was completed, the police submitted the case for review by the District Attorney’s office. The prosecution decided to file formal charges and brought two separate instances against the bar owner for peeping. These formal charges were subsequently filed against him in the Superior Court. The firm was hired to represent the client immediately after charges were filed.
The lead trial counsel prepared tirelessly for the jury trial while initiating his own investigation to gather more evidence. Trial documents, witness interviews, as well as exhibits were made in preparation for early submittal to the District Attorney’s office to prevent any delay in proceeding with litigation. On the day that was scheduled to begin jury selection, pretrial evidence motions, and jury instructions, the firm announced ready to proceed with litigation.
After carefully analyzing the case, with the help of the defense's investigation, the district attorney’s office decided against moving forward with the case and dismissed all charges against the client.