Attempted Murder



R. v. T.S.

Mr. Zoppi’s client was accused of stabbing the complainant in this case several times in an apartment building and then following the complainant outside to slash him across the throat. At trial, the complainant testified that he had known the accused from five previous occasions in which he had allegedly purchased drugs from the accused. Toronto criminal lawyer Graham Zoppi extensively cross-examined the complainant, pointing out various inconsistencies between the medical report outlining the injuries and the complainant’s account of the incident. The judge found, although the complainant had picked the accused out of a photo lineup, his credibility had been completely undermined by the thorough cross-examination. The client was found not guilty.

R. v. R.H.

In this case, the client was accused of using a machete to attack the complainant while his alleged accomplice tried to run over the complainant in his car. After extensive cross-examination and argument, criminal lawyer Graham Zoppi successfully pointed out to the judge various attempts by the Crown’s witnesses to change their accounts of the incident so as to match up with one another’s. The trial judge cited these changes as the main cause for concern with the case of the prosecution, and the accused was ultimately found not guilty. Click here to view the case: R v. Hussain