Police actions have been called into question following the "disturbing" arrest of a man for trespassing in his home and an ensuing interview described as a "clear and egregious impropriety".
"I have grave concerns for the manner in which the arrest was effected," special magistrate Sean Richter said on Wednesday, when he excluded certain evidence over police errors.
"A series of cascading failures on the part of police to do their job in accordance with the law."
Leonardo Baeza, 39, is facing an ACT Magistrates Court hearing after denying a single charge of aggravated common assault.
Baeza is accused of drunkenly grabbing a phone from a woman's hand on January 28 as she attempted to make a call during a home dispute. He allegedly made contact with her finger in the process.
The arrest
Despite Baeza telling police he lived at the home when they arrived, and the alleged victim agreeing the pair owned the property together, the accused man was arrested for trespassing.
"This isn't your house," police told him more than once, ignoring his protests.
In court, the magistrate said officers had shown a "complete lack of understanding about the law of trespass" and a "complete lack of curiosity" about who lived at or owned the home.
Mr Richter noted Baeza was argumentative but said that was understandable after police had no reasonable suspicion of a trespass offence the man was never charged with.
"Police have not asked the basic, common, simple questions that I often see in this court," the magistrate said.
"[The police officer] prejudged the situation and he did not turn his mind to the law at all."
Defence barrister and former acting director of public prosecutions Anthony Williamson SC said his client owned the property in question and was not barred from it by any court order.
"One would think that before a police officer takes the grave step of depriving someone of their liberty, they would at least have a reasonable or moderate understanding of the legal basis for the arrest," he said in written submissions.
Mr Williamson also told the court the arrest was unlawful due to the unnecessary level of force used by four officers.
"The defendant was face-planted into the ground whilst his hands were being held behind his back," the barrister said.
A prosecutor submitted the officers showed ignorance in carrying out the arrest but their actions had not been malicious.
"Given the power of police, ignorance is not ideal," she said.
Ultimately finding the arrest unlawful, the magistrate said: "The video of the arrest was disturbing."
The watch house interview
On Wednesday, Mr Richter refused the inclusion of an interview Baeza gave to police at the ACT watch house following his arrest and while the accused man was dressed in only underwear.
"He ends up semi-naked in a cell surrounded by a number of police officers, including a female officer, and then he's interviewed in a cell in complete contravention of the commissioner's orders," the magistrate said.
Those police guidelines dictate that a person must be interviewed in an interview room equipped with video recording.
"The word 'must' in that direction is significant," the magistrate said.
Mr Williamson said interviewing Baeza in a cell ran the substantial risk of creating a "police-dominated atmosphere" where his client could feel pressured into making admissions.
"To interview him whilst naked is truly deplorable conduct on the part of police. It constitutes a clear breach of the right against inhuman and degrading conduct," the barrister told the court.
The prosecutor argued the desirability of including the interview in the hearing outweighed the undesirability of how it was obtained.
But the magistrate disagreed and also excluded the alleged victim's evidence in chief interview after finding it had not been conducted as soon as practicable as required by law.
Baeza is set to return on Thursday, when the court will hear if the case against him will continue or be resolved.
- Update: Leonardo Baeza was found not guilty of aggravated common assault on August 15, 2024.
