Woman In Court For Alleged Common Assault Claims Self Defence When She Hit A Man With A Fire Extinguisher

By Alric Lindsay

A woman who appeared in the Summary Court today, September 15, 2026, for an alleged common assault against a man, has had her case deferred until October 2026.  The Chief Magistrate took this decision to allow for a case involving allegations against the man to be completed first.

The court heard from the woman’s attorney, Stacy-Ann Kelly, that the woman acted in self-defence during an alleged attack against her by a man. According to her account, the man attacked her while she was seated in a vehicle, pushing her head down into her lap. In an attempt to escape, she felt under the seat for something to defend herself.  She found a small, white fire extinguisher. She used the fire extinguisher to defend herself, waving it above her head. During the struggle, the man sustained injuries to his forehead. After being struck, the man released her, allowing her to jump out of the vehicle and run into nearby bushes for safety.

Allegedly, the man then drove around attempting to locate her. She had a cell phone and called his mother, who attended the scene and attempted to calm him down.

Reportedly, the woman went and sat in the car.   Allegedly, the man returned to the car and punched the window, striking her in the head. He also allegedly punched her in the face, causing a split lip.

In terms of evidence, the woman reportedly provided the police with a video she recorded on her phone during the incident, though it was not immediately clear if the police had retained or reviewed this footage.   In addition, her lawyer asked for a copy of the charge sheet and the 911 call to be disclosed.   The request for the 911 call was made because, allegedly, it may show that the man was shouting outside the vehicle and attacking the woman when she tried to call 911 for help.  

Lastly, photographic evidence of injuries was requested, with defence counsel asking for electronic versions to clearly see the extent of injuries, noting that photocopies are often of poor quality.  

The woman’s lawyer emphasised that the injuries the woman sustained support her claim of self-defence and that the injuries she inflicted on the man were in the course of escaping a violent attack.  

In the circumstances, the woman’s lawyer formally requested that the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions reconsider the charges against her, arguing that her actions were justified as self-defence.  In the meantime, it is understood that the man has now been charged and his case has been listed for trial.

The Chief Magistrate ruled that the man’s trial should proceed first before further statements are taken in the woman’s case.