WA Misconduct Restraining Order Terms - Is Police Interpretation Correct?

[Charybdis]

Misconduct Restraining Order was placed on neighbour. MRO terms included a statement for neighbour to not come within 5m of any of my property. They have come within 5m, however, on their own property.

Police say he can go within 5m of my property on there own property to conduct lawful business, however, nothing on the MRO states that the neighbour's property is exempt from the MRO terms? Are the police correct? Neighbour's property is not the primary residence.

 

[Migz]

I think you will find the police are correct... For example: how is he/she to mow along the fence line?!?!

 

[Charybdis]

I think you will find the police are correct... for example. how is he/she to mow the along the fence line?!?!

I find it very hard to believe that one can have there day in court for a Magistrate to determine terms for a MRO only for it to be served and for further interpretation of the MRO to be required by Police. I presented all evidence in the court room before a Magistrate where police only have the terms of the MRO. If there was an exclusion zone on his own property it would have been included in MRO.

It should also be noted that the Magistrate made this decision based on the fact that the property is on the market and it was not the primary residence of the neighbour.

Further replies appreciated.

 

[AllForHer]

Forgive me if I'm wrong here, but do you think your neighbour can't have access to the 5m of space between his fence and your fence because of your State-based MRO?

Commonwealth laws and precedents take priority over anything decided at a State level, and Commonwealth case law, loosely transcribed, says that everybody gets to freely enjoy their own property.

 

[sammy01]

So if your neighbour walks on the edge of his own property, he is breaching the MRO because of a 5 metres exclusion zone...

So using the example above - he can't mow his own lawn?

Look the cops have got better things to do. So let me give you an example of how the cops' time gets wasted...

My ex wife put an AVO on me. I was not allowed to go within 10 metres of her. I was not allowed to talk to her. I bumped into her at the shops. I said hello to her and the kids and I left... I left a trolley full of groceries in isle 3 and walked out of Coles.

She calls the cops, I am brought in an interviewed... I am directed to go straight to the cop shop, I have to leave work (my boss is not happy). Did I breach the AVO? Yes. Was her complaint frivolous and stupid? Yes...

If old mate is mowing his lawn, playing cricket with the kids or whatever and that causes him to be within the 5 metres boundary of your property while still in his property, what is the problem?
If he is standing on the fence line hurling abuse at you...Call the cops.

 

[Niki0605]

I too have a MRO on a neighbour. Last night at 12.45am, I received a knock at my door from 2 police, because she had complained about my security camera. They woke me up, I showed them the view and they said all was OK. I asked why they had called so late, they said they had to respond to her call. They were aware of the MRO. My MRO states that she is not allowed to attempt to communicate with the person protected by any means whatsoever.

Is this a breach that the police have been unduly subject to? ​

 

[AllForHer]

How was she attempting to communicate with you?

 

[Rod]

Using the police.

Hmm, considering the time of the morning I'd consider it a breach. There was no need to call police at 12:45 AM to complain, especially if the camera had been installed for some time.

I'd be making a complaint to the police about her misuse of the police and see what happens.

Keep in mind she is allowed to call police whenever she feels threatened, but I can't see a camera mounted on a house as immediately threatening.