SA Magistrates Court - Who is Responsible for Performance of Prosecutors?

Australia's #1 for Law
Join 150,000 Australians every month. Ask a question, respond to a question and better understand the law today!
FREE - Join Now

Sweetcheeks

Active Member
17 March 2017
10
4
34
Adelaide
I am constantly revising my account of what happened so no-one can mistake what happened when I finally find someone who will do something. I will now try the Department of Public Prosecutions. I've been everywhere else. The Police Complaints Authority and the Office of Public Integrity failed miserably as their responses showed they had no idea what had happened despite claiming they had read what I had provided. The Police Commissioner is unable to address complaints since the establishment of the Police Complaints Authority. His department did however refer the matter to the Independent Commissioner Against Corruption to bypass the PCA as I had requested, and go direct to the then Professional Standards & Intelligence Unit, but the Commissioner took it on himself to write to me personally. His letter showed he also had no idea what had happened. When I pointed this out to him, a QC, he refused to have anything more to do with me! So the matter went nowhere. The trouble is, its difficult to find out where to go to get action when the departments which should take up the matter, don't - not because it is a hot potato, but because they are useless! When I challenged the responses from all these departments, they refused to have anything more to do with me - standard Government response.
 

Sweetcheeks

Active Member
17 March 2017
10
4
34
Adelaide
Interestingly, if you take the matter to a Revocation hearing and the Magistrate confirms the evidence proves the essential abuse never took place so there were no grounds for an Intervention Order, you will still remain on Police records with your DNA on the Police Criminal Data Base and have the Intervention Order for life as the Prevention of Abuse (Intervention Orders) Act 2009 makes provision for revocation only where the abuse occurred and there has been change. As any lawyer will confirm, if the alleged victim made false accusations (up to two years gaol) and provided a false Affidavit (penalty 14 years gaol) which put you in Court, then they are unlikely to agree that there has been the necessary change for revocation as they will fear retaliation and want to keep the IO to keep you away. As there is no provision for revocation due to abuse of process/error by Prosecutions to get consent to the IO (they use multiple adjournments to ramp up legal costs till you can no longer pay your lawyer and face financial disaster), although the Magistrate at the Revocation hearing confirms the evidence proves the accusations false, they cannot revoke the IO under the current provisions of the Act! So although known to be a victim of false accusations, you will stay on Police records as a person whose behaviour is of concern with your DNA on the Police Criminal Data Base for life. And there will be nothing on Police records to the effect that the IO is groundless. So if the alleged victim, having got away with it, makes more false complaints, you could very well end up with a conviction and even a gaol term!
 

okanynameyouwishthen

Well-Known Member
12 February 2015
110
12
414
Austral
** BUMP BUMP ** Er, um hey Sweetcheeks are you still around the place ? I'd love to make contact with you privately to discuss this ordeal & share my own personal experiences of very similar ( criminal ) conduct meted out by SAPOL.
Mods. is there a way I can private message sweetcheeks at all ? I can't seem to find it .
cheers
ok
 

Sweetcheeks

Active Member
17 March 2017
10
4
34
Adelaide
** BUMP BUMP ** Er, um hey Sweetcheeks are you still around the place ? I'd love to make contact with you privately to discuss this ordeal & share my own personal experiences of very similar ( criminal ) conduct meted out by SAPOL.
Mods. is there a way I can private message sweetcheeks at all ? I can't seem to find it .
cheers
ok
Hi there, I am still around. I don't know that there is anyway to contact me as I doubt I am allowed to give out my email address on this website.
You might like to know that the responsibility for the performance of Prosecutors has now gone back to the SA Police Commissioner, but they are not responding, when previously they did! Government employees have careers to protect, unfortunately, and if the Government says the matter is to be kept under wraps, it will be, no matter how ethical Police want to be.
I am in the process of putting the final touches on a story I am lodging with a national television program (this is probably a national scandal) as legal opinion is that nothing will happen unless this is done. There have now been approximately 9,000 Intervention Orders served in SA since the Government increased penalties for wasting Police time with false allegations of NON-VIOLENT (no proof) domestic abuse, the Prevention of Abuse (Intervention Orders) Act 2009 became law, and the Director of Public Prosecutions formalised procedures which all Prosecutors are required to follow.
The suicide rate among males citing "relationship breakdown" is escalating annually. I believe there is a connection, and parents and siblings could confirm whether Prosecutor violation of their family member's rights played a part. Certainly, labelling an innocent person a domestic abuser to Police would do that.
The following indicates that Police Prosecutors know they have to follow the same rules as Prosecutors do for major criminal cases.
To reiterate - "my" Prosecutor panicked when I sought and was granted a trial date to challenge her grounds for an IO. First she approached my lawyer and attempted to influence her advice to me so I would withdraw my challenge, she could avoid exposure in Court that she had completely violated all my rights, and save her job. When that didn't work, she then cancelled my trial date without my agreement to withdraw my challenge, and lied rather desperately in an email to my lawyer (which I have) that the Magistrate had agreed to the IO (no, he had set the trial date she had just cancelled) and the alleged victim still wanted it (when that was not possible under the Act as abuse must be present or the expectation it will occur for a Prosecutor to have grounds to apply for an IO).
Since then 4 Prosecutors have risked their careers and protected Prosecutions by not advising the alleged victim after Revocation hearings that they knew he had lied and there had been no grounds for an IO, and done nothing to clear my name because that would result in an investigation of their procedures, and cost a lot of careers. However, there was a case in the Elizabeth Court which was much the same as mine, but the lawyer outsmarted the Prosecutor by drawing the Magistrate's attention to the fact the Prosecutor knew the alleged victim wanted to withdraw the allegations (she had discovered the huge penalties for wasting Police time with false allegations), but the Prosecutor had pursued the matter for 6 months anyway - to drive up the alleged offender's legal costs till he faced financial ruin and agreed in desperation to a groundless IO. The alleged offender's charges were withdrawn and the Magistrate awarded him costs against Prosecutions. This was reported in the Sunday Mail.
I think you can take it that (female) Prosecutions have to follow the same rules as other Prosecutors and are pretty desperate to prevent exposure. I say female, as it is unlikely a male Prosecutor would be involved in "man bashing", which makes men appear guilty, enables vindictive women to escape the penalties for wasting Police time, and ensures Prosecutors always win.
Therefore they need to be exposed on national television, and because I kept a detailed record of my experience with the documentation to prove it, I can do that. Hopefully, that will result in a massive class action law suit, with the respective Governments having to pay compensation of defamation, discrimination, pain and suffering, and legal costs. That is my dearest wish! May result in a bringing a few Governments down! At least, thousands of men will be warned. All it takes to be a victim is a failed relationship, a vindictive spouse, and a female hard-line feminist Prosecutor .
 

Sweetcheeks

Active Member
17 March 2017
10
4
34
Adelaide
The Police penalties for those who wast their time with false allegations were changed in 2009, the Prevention of Abuse (Intervention Orders) Act 2009 became law and the DPP formalised procedures which Prosecutors were required to follow to ensure justice for both parties. The Police Complaints Authority was also set up at about this time. I believe all these are connected and as a result of the public outcry over Prosecutors violation of the rights of males in relation to false allegations of non-violent (no proof required) domestic abuse.
Just two problems. It appears it was just assumed Prosecutors would give up their "man bashing" and now follow the new procedures, but no checks to ensure they did were put in place, so of course, they didn't. They know Police colleagues, Magistrates, Court staff, Legal Services Commission lawyers etc. (i.e. Government employees) can't risk being labelled "whistle blowers", that criminal lawyers can't risk outcomes for future clients by being too vocal and alleged offenders just don't have the money to challenge their grounds for an IO at a trial, which their lawyers will advise against due to the difficulty of disproving non-violent abuse.
Whoever drafted the legislation naively assumed the same thing, as revocation is possible only if there has been "change"., i.e. there is no provision for cancellation due to Prosecutor not following essential procedure. If you prove the abuse never occurred in the first place, of course, "change" is impossible. I have had two Magistrates confirm that my evidence proved the abuse required under the Act was not present (i.e. I was not guilty), but then have to advise me that that meant the IO could never be revoked as if the abuse never happened there cannot be "change". I know Magistrates find this very frustrating, but they can do little. It would take an amendment to an Act of Parliament to fix the problem, but that would also draw public attention to what has to be a scandal of major proportions. So probably won't happen - unless there is again a major public outcry. I am working on that.
 

Qadeer khan

Active Member
25 February 2019
14
2
34
While they only directly manage serious indictable crimes the Department of Public Prosecutions SA should have oversight of all prosecutions.
 

Sweetcheeks

Active Member
17 March 2017
10
4
34
Adelaide
While they only directly manage serious indictable crimes the Department of Public Prosecutions SA should have oversight of all prosecutions.
Thanks for your contribution.
I understand that since the SA Police Complaints Authority was absorbed into the Office of Public Integrity because it hadn't performed, responsibility for dealing with Police Prosecutors has gone back to the Commissioner of Police. But when I approached that department again, I got no response. That appears to indicate that the Government does not want this matter investigated which would attract publicity and draw attention to the huge waste of Police time of false allegations of non-violent domestic abuse, and the massive cost to the public purse, plus it could bring the Government down.
We had a situation with Henry Keogh who spent 21 years in gaol for murder on faulty forensics, despite the Government having received a report to this effect 10 years again which they apparently sat on, before Henry was finally set free. Unfortunately, many still believe Henry guilty and are outraged that he should be paid compensation for his 21 year ordeal, given it comes out of the public purse.
You can imagine, then, the effect of the Government having to compensation (now) approximately 9,000 victims since 2009 of likely false allegations of non-violent domestic abuse (no proof required for Station Police to treat the alleged offender as guilty) for Prosecutor violation of their rights in forcing victims of very likely false allegations to consent to groundless IOs so they will appear the guilty party, allowing vindictive alleged victims to escape the penalties for wasting Police time and public money, and Prosecutions always win!
And, of course, there is the huge amount of money it would cost to go back through 20 years of Court records to identify Prosecutions' victims, destroy Police briefs, remove them from Police records and their DNA from the Police Criminal Data Base (which I understand is not possible, once you are on it, you are on it for life regardless of guilt). The victims of Prosecutors who partake in this unethical activity should be compensated for defamation, discrimination and victimisation, legal costs, loss of income (because an IO affects employability) and pain and suffering. And, of course, all the Prosecutors lose their jobs!
This is a massive scandal for SA, even more of a scandal if it is nation-wide, which is likely. Yet in reply to my complaint about Prosecutions' violation of my rights, all the government departments I approached came out in support of Prosecutions without contacting me to check anything, and without knowing what had happened (obvious from their responses). Clearly the Government does not want this matter investigated and publicised. They certainly know from the 2009 changes (to Police penalties, the enactment of new legislation setting out provisions under which Prosecutors must work, and the DPP formalising essential guidelines for Prosecutors to follow, to ensure justice for both parties) exactly what Prosecutors had been doing for years - probably from Magistrates and criminal lawyers. But the Government naively then put nothing in place to ensure these new procedures were followed - so of course they weren't. And because Station Police procedure is virtual entrapment for those who waste Police time with false allegations, in that they are not permitted to advise alleged victims at the first complaint that with 3 complaints the matter will go to Court where the onus will be on them to prove the allegations (if proved false, they will face the severe penalties [false statements 2 years' gaol maximum, false Affidavit [3rd complaint] 14 years gaol]), the word has continued to spread that there false allegations can be made to Police without risk, to destroy the reputations of former partners. As the suicide rate among men citing "relationship breakdown" is known to be escalating, something has to happen, and soon!
 

WarrenS

Active Member
23 October 2018
6
1
34
I have just seen the messages on this site. I have a few questions, who here has had false charges against them, who has not been able to make a statement when accused of a crime, who has had the court listing change by the prosecution to influence the court. Example, mine was aggravated assault no weapon, the prosecutor changed it to aggravated assault with a weapon against a child or a spouse, this was done to influence the out come in the court
The reasons I am asking this question, it seems most here have gone through the same as me. I am in the process of suing individual police, SAPOL and the prosecution for malicious intent
I have also found a letter tabled to parliament in 2007 regarding allowing both parties make a statement which police have refused to do in last 12 years, which I beleive has left SAPOL open to a class action law suit
Any one with info or want to combine in a class action law suit please contact me here
 

WarrenS

Active Member
23 October 2018
6
1
34
Thanks for your contribution.
I understand that since the SA Police Complaints Authority was absorbed into the Office of Public Integrity because it hadn't performed, responsibility for dealing with Police Prosecutors has gone back to the Commissioner of Police. But when I approached that department again, I got no response. That appears to indicate that the Government does not want this matter investigated which would attract publicity and draw attention to the huge waste of Police time of false allegations of non-violent domestic abuse, and the massive cost to the public purse, plus it could bring the Government down.
We had a situation with Henry Keogh who spent 21 years in gaol for murder on faulty forensics, despite the Government having received a report to this effect 10 years again which they apparently sat on, before Henry was finally set free. Unfortunately, many still believe Henry guilty and are outraged that he should be paid compensation for his 21 year ordeal, given it comes out of the public purse.
You can imagine, then, the effect of the Government having to compensation (now) approximately 9,000 victims since 2009 of likely false allegations of non-violent domestic abuse (no proof required for Station Police to treat the alleged offender as guilty) for Prosecutor violation of their rights in forcing victims of very likely false allegations to consent to groundless IOs so they will appear the guilty party, allowing vindictive alleged victims to escape the penalties for wasting Police time and public money, and Prosecutions always win!
And, of course, there is the huge amount of money it would cost to go back through 20 years of Court records to identify Prosecutions' victims, destroy Police briefs, remove them from Police records and their DNA from the Police Criminal Data Base (which I understand is not possible, once you are on it, you are on it for life regardless of guilt). The victims of Prosecutors who partake in this unethical activity should be compensated for defamation, discrimination and victimisation, legal costs, loss of income (because an IO affects employability) and pain and suffering. And, of course, all the Prosecutors lose their jobs!
This is a massive scandal for SA, even more of a scandal if it is nation-wide, which is likely. Yet in reply to my complaint about Prosecutions' violation of my rights, all the government departments I approached came out in support of Prosecutions without contacting me to check anything, and without knowing what had happened (obvious from their responses). Clearly the Government does not want this matter investigated and publicised. They certainly know from the 2009 changes (to Police penalties, the enactment of new legislation setting out provisions under which Prosecutors must work, and the DPP formalising essential guidelines for Prosecutors to follow, to ensure justice for both parties) exactly what Prosecutors had been doing for years - probably from Magistrates and criminal lawyers. But the Government naively then put nothing in place to ensure these new procedures were followed - so of course they weren't. And because Station Police procedure is virtual entrapment for those who waste Police time with false allegations, in that they are not permitted to advise alleged victims at the first complaint that with 3 complaints the matter will go to Court where the onus will be on them to prove the allegations (if proved false, they will face the severe penalties [false statements 2 years' gaol maximum, false Affidavit [3rd complaint] 14 years gaol]), the word has continued to spread that there false allegations can be made to Police without risk, to destroy the reputations of former partners. As the suicide rate among men citing "relationship breakdown" is known to be escalating, something has to happen, and soon!


I have just seen the messages on this site. I have a few questions, who here has had false charges against them, who has not been able to make a statement when accused of a crime, who has had the court listing change by the prosecution to influence the court. Example, mine was aggravated assault no weapon, the prosecutor changed it to aggravated assault with a weapon against a child or a spouse, this was done to influence the out come in the court
The reasons I am asking this question, it seems most here have gone through the same as me. I am in the process of suing individual police, SAPOL and the prosecution for malicious intent
I have also found a letter tabled to parliament in 2007 regarding allowing both parties make a statement twhich police have refused to do in last 12 years and follow the crime reporting manual, which I believe has left SAPOL open to a class action law suit
Any one with info or want to combine in a class action law suit please contact me here
 

WarrenS

Active Member
23 October 2018
6
1
34
** BUMP BUMP ** Er, um hey Sweetcheeks are you still around the place ? I'd love to make contact with you privately to discuss this ordeal & share my own personal experiences of very similar ( criminal ) conduct meted out by SAPOL.
Mods. is there a way I can private message sweetcheeks at all ? I can't seem to find it .
cheers
ok
I have just seen the messages on this site. I have a few questions, who here has had false charges against them, who has not been able to make a statement when accused of a crime, who has had the court listing change by the prosecution to influence the court. Example, mine was aggravated assault no weapon, the prosecutor changed it to aggravated assault with a weapon against a child or a spouse, this was done to influence the out come in the court
The reasons I am asking this question, it seems most here have gone through the same as me. I am in the process of suing individual police, SAPOL and the prosecution for malicious intent
I have also found a letter tabled to parliament in 2007 regarding allowing both parties make a statement which police have refused to do in last 12 years, which I beleive has left SAPOL open to a class action law suit
Any one with info or want to combine in a class action law suit please contact me here