Latest news with #RedfernLegalCentre
The Guardian
18-05-2025
- The Guardian
‘Absolutely no evidence': how NSW police backflipped on unlawful strip-search
Raya Meredith was at one of Australia's biggest music festivals when a drug detection dog sniffed in her direction. The dog then walked on, the New South Wakes supreme court recently heard, but police officers stopped her. They took her bag and searched it. The 27-year-old, who was postpartum at the time, was then taken into a makeshift tarpaulin, where a female police officer asked her to take all her clothes off, bend over and bare her bottom, drop her breasts and remove her tampon. At one point, a male officer walked in unannounced. The search found no drugs and nothing else illegal. 'It was a horrible thing to go through,' Meredith said in emotional testimony on the first day of a class action against the state of NSW about the search. But so too, Meredith told the court, was the 'gaslighting' she endured for years by the police force who denied her version of events, leaving her feeling 'violated, yet again'. Shortly before a class action against the NSW police began almost two weeks ago, the force back flipped and admitted in court documents to unlawfully strip-searching her. Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email 'It was difficult to have police officers, who were there, who saw it, say I was lying,' she said. Meredith is the lead plaintiff of a class action that wrapped up this week, which was brought by Slater and Gordon Lawyers and the Redfern Legal Centre against the state of NSW over allegedly unlawful strip-searches conducted by police, including of children. Three thousand people have signed on to the class action, but the affected cohort could be twice as large. The case did not just focus on Meredith's evidence or police practices when it comes to conducting strip-searches. A large portion of closing arguments this week went to the police's conduct throughout the case. For two years, until just before the proceedings began, the police denied the search of Meredith was unlawful, arguing they had had 'reasonable suspicion' based on her demeanour and body language. The police had called 22 witnesses, mostly police officers, to contradict Meredith's version of events. But in the days before the hearing began, the police withdrew their witnesses. Meredith was the only witness to appear, taking the case down from the scheduled 20 days to just five. The police had also attempted to subpoena Meredith's medical history even though she had not made a personal injury claim. 'The plaintiff's evidence was, 'If I could have walked out of this case then and there I would have,'' Kylie Nomchong SC, who acted on behalf of the plaintiffs, told the court. 'We say the issue of the subpoena was a strategic one designed to and having the effect of intimidating [Meredith] and that's exactly what it did.' Nomchong said the police should pay aggravated damages due to their conduct during the class action. She told the court the police had made the 'outrageous' submission 'asking your honour to infer that it was objectively necessary to search the plaintiff's breasts and genital area' … without any evidence whatsoever'. 'It's just offensive,' Nomchong said. Two of the witnesses the police force withdrew were the female police officer who conducted the search and the male officer who walked in unannounced. 'The only available inference is that any evidence from those police officers would not have assisted the defendant,' Nomchong said. Julian Sexton SC defended the police's conduct in the case during his closing argument, saying aggravated damages could not be awarded because Meredith had not been recalled to give evidence about how she felt about NSW police's conduct during the class action. However Justice Dina Yehia, who oversaw the case, said she was concerned about their conduct. Specifically, the police having had three iterations of its defence before backflipping shortly before proceedings began to admit it did unlawfully strip-search Meredith. 'That is a matter, I'll be quite honest with you, of grave concern to me,' Yehia said on Thursday. The judge said she was concerned that the police defence suggested officers had formed a reasonable suspicion to strip-search Meredith based on 'things like her demeanour, what was said outside the tent, and [the officers] recalling it was said outside the tent and not inside'. 'There is absolutely no evidence, unless you can take me to it and I've missed something,' Yehia said to Sexton. 'All I have is the officers' statements that say either they don't remember the search, or both that they don't remember the search nor remember the lead plaintiff. In those circumstances, I'm just not sure how this could ever have proceeded in the way that it did with the initial pleadings.' Sexton responded that the defence was based on police 'practice' in such instances, adding it was 'not [based] on distinct recollections of somebody'. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion He also defended the attempt to subpoena Meredith's medical records, saying: 'There is nothing inherently objectionable about issuing a subpoena' and rebutted claims it was designed to intimidate Meredith. 'It was not issued for an improper purpose. There's no evidence to that effect, he told the court. In her opening arguments, Nomchong had told the court that Meredith's circumstance, as lead plaintiff, was not unique, but demonstrative of systemic failures. 'This is an extraordinary case, but not an isolated one, it is at the serious end, but not the most serious.' She argued the vast majority of strip-searches conducted by state police between 2018 and 2022 at music festivals were unlawful because they did not meet the legal threshold for being carried out in serious and urgent circumstances, and argued they were instead treated as 'routine'. Of issue, Nomchong told the court, was also that police knew drug detection dogs are only accurate 30% of the time. Yet they continue to use them as the primary justification for searches. 'That was something the police service knew yet we saw COPS event after COPS event,' she said, referring to the Computerised Operational Policing System database, 'where the only indication for the event was drug dog indication'. She told the court that before the 2018 Splendour in the Grass festival where Meredith was searched, police had little direction on how to conduct a lawful strip-search, and that officers had received 'absolutely negligible' training at the academy and as part of ongoing mandatory training. She argued this was a statewide issue. '[This] didn't just happen during the Splendour in the Grass event, it's happening across the state in relation to all of the music festivals,' Nomchong told the court. 'Same input, same result.' But Sexton disputed these claims, saying each case would have to be considered individually. He also pointed to figures which showed there had been few complaints about unlawful strip-searches between 2016 and 2018. He argued strip-searches at music festivals did fall within legal criteria that police can carry out a strip-search in serious and urgent circumstances, because the searches were 'trying to stop people dying'. 'The urgency of the circumstance is that if the strip-search is not conducted, the drug … will either be consumed or disposed of,' Sexton told the court. He also said that after a dog indicates it has detected drugs, police can then arrest on their own trained assessment such as how a person is behaving. Turning to claims that police considered strip-searches as a matter of 'routine', Sexton disputed this, saying: '[There's a] very, very, very small number of people who are being searched.' The court heard there were 36,000 people at the 2018 Splendour in the Grass. The court was told 148 people were strip-searched and 50 others were searched clothed. Sexton also contradicted claims by Nomchong that police were not adequately directed or trained. 'This isn't about teaching your grandmother to suck eggs, this is about an operational order to experienced policemen,' he said. Closing arguments ended on Friday.
The Guardian
15-05-2025
- The Guardian
Judge suggests NSW police had ‘absolutely no evidence' to justify main strip-search in class action
A Sydney judge says the way the New South Wales police force defended a claim it unlawfully strip-searched a woman at a music festival – including a last-minute admission – was 'of grave concern to me'. Justice Dina Yehia made the comment in the NSW supreme court during closing arguments in a class action against the police. The state of NSW has disputed that the vast majority of strip-searches conducted by police between 2018 and 2022 at music festivals were unlawful. NSW police did, however, admit in court documents before the hearings began last week to unlawfully strip-searching the lead plaintiff, Raya Meredith, at a music festival in 2018. Meredith is the lead plaintiff of a group of 3,000 people, including children, searched by police. She was strip-searched at the 2018 Splendour in the Grass festival after a drug dog sniffed in her direction but then walked on. The class action is being led by Slater and Gordon lawyers and the Redfern Legal Centre. Julian Sexton SC, acting on behalf of NSW police, on Thursday disputed the plaintiff's call for aggravated damages to be paid because of the force's conduct during proceedings. He argued aggravated damages could not be awarded because Meredith had not been recalled to give evidence about how she felt about NSW police's conduct during the class action. Yehia said in response she was 'much more concerned' about the police having three iterations of its defence before backflipping shortly before proceedings began and admitting it did unlawfully strip-search Meredith. 'That is a matter, I'll be quite honest with you, of grave concern to me,' Yehia said on Thursday. The judge said she was concerned the police defence suggested officers had formed a reasonable suspicion to strip-search Meredith based on 'things like her demeanour, what was said outside the tent, and [the officers] recalling it was said outside the tent and not inside'. 'There is absolutely no evidence, unless you can take me to it and I've missed something,' Yehia said to Sexton. Sign up to Morning Mail Our Australian morning briefing breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion 'All I have is the officers' statements that say either they don't remember the search, or both that they don't remember the search nor remember the lead plaintiff. In those circumstances, I'm just not sure how this could ever have proceeded in the way that it did with the initial pleadings.' In the days before the hearing began, the state of NSW withdrew 22 witnesses, mostly police officers who had been due to contest Meredith's version of events. That change saw the case reduced from a scheduled 2o days to three days. Sexton argued the defence was based on police 'practice' in such instances, adding it was 'not [based] on distinct recollections of somebody'. Yehia said the police suggesting there were 'reasonable grounds' for the search due to Meredith's physical appearance and body language were 'specific matters relating to this plaintiff in circumstances where [the female police officer who searched her] not only doesn't remember, but as far as I understand it, didn't even make a notebook entry in relation to that interaction'. Closing arguments before Yehia were expected to end on Thursday.
Perth Now
15-05-2025
- Perth Now
‘Grave concerns' in strip search case
A judge presiding over the case of a woman suing the state of NSW over a strip search at a popular music festival has told the court she has 'grave concerns' about the conduct of the defence, who admitted after two years the search was unlawful. Raya Meredith was made to undress in front of a police officer, lift her breasts, and remove her tampon during a 'humiliating' and terrifying strip search at the Splendour in the Grass music festival in 2018 that police later admitted was illegal. The then-27-year-old is the lead plaintiff in a class-action lawsuit brought by Slater and Gordon and the Redfern Legal Centre against the state of NSW on behalf of more than 3000 people likely subjected to illegal strip searches from 2016-2022. Ms Meredith's lawyer, Kylie Nomchong SC argued in her closing statements Tuesday and Wednesday that there was a failure on the part of 'senior echelons' of NSW Police to ensure proper training and supervision given to police doing searches. The state of NSW is being sued over a strip search of a woman. NCA NewsWire / Flavio Brancaleone Credit: News Corp Australia Julian Sexton SC, who is representing the state of NSW, pushed back on claims by Ms Nomchong about police training and the findings of a report by the Lessons Learned Unit (LLU) following a complaint after a 2013 Mardi Gras afterparty. Mr Sexton said the report, contrary to submissions by Ms Nomchong, did not represent an 'admission of widespread unlawful use of strip searches' or routine unlawful strip searches and instead only made 'recommendations about best practice'. He went on to tell the court that out of 172,000 searches in 2016, 3850 were strip searches. Resulting from those searches were only 79 complaints, four of which were sustained, with a further two sustained complaints the following year. 'This demonstrates that there was a decreasing number of complaints sustained. There were only five complaints sustained in the period up until November 2018. That doesn't indicate a widespread use of unlawful searches,' Mr Saxton said. He made similar claims about the 'very small number' of civil cases. Justice Dina Yehia said the defence case and state of NSW's admission that Ms Meredith's strip search was illegal were of 'grave concern' during Thursday's hearing. Justice Yehia told Mr Saxton before the lunch adjournment that 'the conduct of the proceedings in relation to the three iterations of defence that were initially relied upon, that is a matter, I'll be quite honest with you, of grave concern to me. 'All I have is three officers' statements that say either that they don't remember the search at all or both that they don't remember the search nor remember the plaintiff, the lead plaintiff in those circumstances,' she said, referring to Ms Meredith. The closing statements are now in their third day. NewsWire / Luis Enrique Ascui Credit: News Corp Australia 'I'm just not sure how this could ever have proceeded in the way that it did with the initial pleadings.' Mr Saxton said the admission about the legality of the search was 'more accurate to say it was an admission based on the absence of proof' and police may have based their recollections on 'practice' rather than specific memory. In response, Justice Yehia said: 'An assertion that the officer's assessment of the plaintiff's demeanour, physical appearance, body language and answers to questions while they spoke outside the tent is very specific.' Under NSW law, strip searches – which are recognised as being 'highly invasive and humiliating' – are supposed to be undertaken within specific statutory guidelines, including preconditions of 'seriousness and urgency' that they be done. Ms Nomchong told the court on Tuesday that not a single COPS event log contained why a strip search was necessary, and the general duties officers were 'defective in their understanding of the basis on which strip searches could be carried out'. 'They were not supervised. They were not trained. And, as a direct result, that is why my plaintiff was unlawfully strip searched … along with others who attended the music festival in 2018,' Ms Nomchong said in her more than six-hour statement. Resuming on Wednesday, Ms Nomchong urged the court to award exemplary damages 'not only to express the court's disapprobation but because of the manifest breaches of the (Law Enforcement Powers and Responsibilities Act) by searching officers'. Ms Nomchong went on to add 'but also because of the … manifest failures on the part of the senior echelons of the NSW Police Force responsible for both general and focus training for conducting strip searches' in the state at the time.
West Australian
15-05-2025
- West Australian
Judge's ‘grave concerns' in NSW strip search class action case
A judge presiding over the case of a woman suing the state of NSW over a strip search at a popular music festival has told the court she has 'grave concerns' about the conduct of the defence, who admitted after two years the search was unlawful. Raya Meredith was made to undress in front of a police officer, lift her breasts, and remove her tampon during a 'humiliating' and terrifying strip search at the Splendour in the Grass music festival in 2018 that police later admitted was illegal. The then-27-year-old is the lead plaintiff in a class-action lawsuit brought by Slater and Gordon and the Redfern Legal Centre against the state of NSW on behalf of more than 3000 people likely subjected to illegal strip searches from 2016-2022. Ms Meredith's lawyer, Kylie Nomchong SC argued in her closing statements Tuesday and Wednesday that there was a failure on the part of 'senior echelons' of NSW Police to ensure proper training and supervision given to police doing searches. Julian Sexton SC, who is representing the state of NSW, pushed back on claims by Ms Nomchong about police training and the findings of a report by the Lessons Learned Unit (LLU) following a complaint after a 2013 Mardi Gras afterparty. Mr Sexton said the report, contrary to submissions by Ms Nomchong, did not represent an 'admission of widespread unlawful use of strip searches' or routine unlawful strip searches and instead only made 'recommendations about best practice'. He went on to tell the court that out of 172,000 searches in 2016, 3850 were strip searches. Resulting from those searches were only 79 complaints, four of which were sustained, with a further two sustained complaints the following year. 'This demonstrates that there was a decreasing number of complaints sustained. There were only five complaints sustained in the period up until November 2018. That doesn't indicate a widespread use of unlawful searches,' Mr Saxton said. He made similar claims about the 'very small number' of civil cases. Justice Dina Yehia said the defence case and state of NSW's admission that Ms Meredith's strip search was illegal were of 'grave concern' during Thursday's hearing. Justice Yehia told Mr Saxton before the lunch adjournment that 'the conduct of the proceedings in relation to the three iterations of defence that were initially relied upon, that is a matter, I'll be quite honest with you, of grave concern to me. 'All I have is three officers' statements that say either that they don't remember the search at all or both that they don't remember the search nor remember the plaintiff, the lead plaintiff in those circumstances,' she said, referring to Ms Meredith. 'I'm just not sure how this could ever have proceeded in the way that it did with the initial pleadings.' Mr Saxton said the admission about the legality of the search was 'more accurate to say it was an admission based on the absence of proof' and police may have based their recollections on 'practice' rather than specific memory. In response, Justice Yehia said: 'An assertion that the officer's assessment of the plaintiff's demeanour, physical appearance, body language and answers to questions while they spoke outside the tent is very specific.' Under NSW law, strip searches – which are recognised as being 'highly invasive and humiliating' – are supposed to be undertaken within specific statutory guidelines, including preconditions of 'seriousness and urgency' that they be done. Ms Nomchong told the court on Tuesday that not a single COPS event log contained why a strip search was necessary, and the general duties officers were 'defective in their understanding of the basis on which strip searches could be carried out'. 'They were not supervised. They were not trained. And, as a direct result, that is why my plaintiff was unlawfully strip searched … along with others who attended the music festival in 2018,' Ms Nomchong said in her more than six-hour statement. Resuming on Wednesday, Ms Nomchong urged the court to award exemplary damages 'not only to express the court's disapprobation but because of the manifest breaches of the (Law Enforcement Powers and Responsibilities Act) by searching officers'. Ms Nomchong went on to add 'but also because of the … manifest failures on the part of the senior echelons of the NSW Police Force responsible for both general and focus training for conducting strip searches' in the state at the time.
The Guardian
14-05-2025
- The Guardian
NSW police argument that unlawful strip-search was necessary is ‘outrageous', class action lawyer says
New South Wales police made an 'outrageous' argument that it was 'objectively necessary' to search a woman's genital area during a strip-search at a music festival, despite admitting the search was unlawful, a court has heard. The police force admitted in court documents that its July 2018 strip-search of Raya Meredith at Splendour in the Grass – which discovered nothing illegal – was unlawful and unjustified. Meredith is the lead plaintiff of a group of 3,000 people subjected to potentially unlawful strip-searches at music festivals by NSW police officers between 2016 and 2022. They are part of a class action, brought by Slater and Gordon lawyers and the Redfern Legal Centre, against the state of NSW over allegedly unlawful strip-searches – including of children – by police. The affected cohort could be more than twice that size. Last week, the court heard from Meredith, who gave emotional testimony about her strip-search by police in a makeshift tarpaulin tent at the 2018 Splendour in the Grass after a drug dog sniffed in her direction but then walked on. During the search, Meredith – who was 27 at the time and postpartum – was asked to remove her tampon Acting for the plaintiffs, Kylie Nomchong SC, told the court in her closing argument that NSW police should pay aggravated damages due to their conduct during the class action. She said on Wednesday that the police, who are yet to give their closing argument, had argued in a submission that aspects of Meredith's search were 'objectively reasonably necessary' despite admitting the search was unlawful. 'We get to the quite outrageous submissions ... where the defendant is asking your honour to infer that it was objectively necessary to search the plaintiff's breasts and genital area,' Nomchong told the court. 'It is unbelievably offensive to assert, without any evidence whatsoever, that there was some objectively reasonable basis on the part of the searching officer to inspect the plaintiff's vagina, to ask her to pull out her tampon, to ask her to bear her buttocks and anal area and to bend over and drop her breasts. It's just offensive.' Justice Dina Yehia responded by stating she would also question the police's legal team. 'I'm not quite sure I understand those submissions, given the way this matter has proceeded,' the judge said. Nomchong also raised the decision by NSW police not to call any witnesses. In the days before the hearing began, the state of NSW withdrew 22 witnesses, mostly police officers, who were due to contest Meredith's version of events. That change saw the case reduced from a scheduled 2o days to three days. Sign up to Morning Mail Our Australian morning briefing breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion The female police officer who conducted the strip search was one of the witnesses the police force withdrew. 'All we know about her is that there's nothing in her notebook and she has no recollection of it whatsoever,' Nomchong told the court. 'The only available inference is that any evidence from those police officers would not have assisted the defendant.' Nomchong told the court that because no officers were called, it was difficult to know whether it was 'deliberate or not' that a male officer who came into the tent while Meredith was undressed. 'On the plaintiff's unchallenged evidence, he came in and he observed her in that position, there is no basis on which to say he wasn't a participant in the search,' Nomchong told the court. 'He didn't stand outside the tent and say: 'knock, knock, can I come in? Is it all right?' He burst in unannounced.' Closing arguments before Yehia were expected to end on Wednesday.
