NSW Civil remedies for false accusations
- Thread starter Jaywoo220
- Start date
In part at least ....
You = Police attended your property, smashed in a door & arrested you
Detail = Police attended your parents house to question you over an alleged breach of an AVO. You refused to co-operate. It escalated. You were charged with resisting arrest
You = I can sue the police for trespass
Detail = They were there in the course of duty investigating a complaint of a breach of AVO
You= I can sue them for a new door
Detail = The door was damaged as a direct result of your own actions in refusing to co-operate. Their actions would be accepted as reasonable force
You = The allegations of a breach were false; therefore, the charge should be dropped.
Detail = The charge of resisting arrest wouldn’t have happened if you co-operated. The complaint of a breach & your actions that lead to the charge are separate
I'm sure there is still more we don't know about .... Hard work getting the facts out of you
well mate this is not the first time the nice folk have tried to provide you with information when you yourself have provided us with stuff all to go on.
YOu have had this question answered for you prevously....
So when you write:
"I didnt get an answer regarding possible causes of action. Please provide."
I bloody well did. You couldn't be bothered to read it.
I have attached an article. You should read it. If you can't be bothered then don't come back here champ because I spent time doing research and frankly, it aint that hard. I don't know why you couldn't have done it yourself. I may well have wasted my time looking for information about unlawful arrest because that might not be relevant.... But when you come here and provide stuff all information for folk to go on, you should be grateful to get any help.
YOu have had this question answered for you prevously....
So when you write:
"I didnt get an answer regarding possible causes of action. Please provide."
I bloody well did. You couldn't be bothered to read it.
I have attached an article. You should read it. If you can't be bothered then don't come back here champ because I spent time doing research and frankly, it aint that hard. I don't know why you couldn't have done it yourself. I may well have wasted my time looking for information about unlawful arrest because that might not be relevant.... But when you come here and provide stuff all information for folk to go on, you should be grateful to get any help.
It’s relatively simple - ask broad questions, get broad answers. Are they useful? Somewhat... maybe... possibly. That’s the type of answer you’re going to get when you leave out the details.
There is absolutely no problem in asking the broad question. Just be prepared for a relatively useless answer, or one that comes with so many ifs/buts/maybes that it’s effectively useless without more information, or a request for more details. The problem lies in asking a broad question and expecting you’ll get a detailed or unconditional answer, or one that’s actually correct for your circumstances. I understand people want nice simple answers and nice simple outcomes. In all but the most basic respects, law tends to have neither of these - particularly when you’re looking at the adversarial aspects.
There is absolutely no problem in asking the broad question. Just be prepared for a relatively useless answer, or one that comes with so many ifs/buts/maybes that it’s effectively useless without more information, or a request for more details. The problem lies in asking a broad question and expecting you’ll get a detailed or unconditional answer, or one that’s actually correct for your circumstances. I understand people want nice simple answers and nice simple outcomes. In all but the most basic respects, law tends to have neither of these - particularly when you’re looking at the adversarial aspects.
hey so I read that article I sent you. I'm thinking you wont.
short version - If your plan is to use the 'tresspass' argument - based on that article you've got nothing. Not unless you can establish that the avo had been revoked by a magistrate and was no longer active. (I'm assuming this is about the time the cops arrested you when you refused to talk to them about an alleged breach of avo) But again, I'm making assumptions because you've given very little detail to help the nice punters here give more precise information.
short version - If your plan is to use the 'tresspass' argument - based on that article you've got nothing. Not unless you can establish that the avo had been revoked by a magistrate and was no longer active. (I'm assuming this is about the time the cops arrested you when you refused to talk to them about an alleged breach of avo) But again, I'm making assumptions because you've given very little detail to help the nice punters here give more precise information.
Similar threads
