The Mystery of the ‘No Caller ID’: How We Defeated a False AVO Breach Allegation and Won Costs
Please find the formal Court orders relating to this matter annexed at the bottom of this article.
Imagine this: you are at home, minding your own business, and following the rules of an interim Apprehended Domestic Violence Order (ADVO). Suddenly, the police knock on your door. They tell you that your former partner has reported you for calling them three times from a “No Caller ID” number. You know you didn’t do it. You even show the police your phone to prove there are no outgoing calls. Yet, they arrest you and charge you anyway.
Does this sound like a nightmare? For our client, Mr. K, this was a reality.
In a recent case at Blacktown Local Court, National Criminal Lawyers® (NCL) successfully defended Mr. K against a charge of contravening an AVO. Not only were the charges withdrawn and dismissed, but we also secured a significant costs order of $9,900.00 against the NSW Police.
This case highlights a growing issue in the NSW justice system: the reliance on unsubstantiated allegations to bring serious criminal charges. In this case study, we’ll break down the law, the evidence, and how our specialist Criminal Defence Lawyers Sydney can make the difference between a criminal record and a total victory.
What is a Breach of an AVO (Section 14)?
Under the Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW), specifically Section 14(1), it is a criminal offence to knowingly contravene a prohibition or restriction specified in an Apprehended Violence Order.
The penalties are surprisingly harsh. If convicted, you could face:
- A fine of up to $5,500;
- Imprisonment for up to 2 years; or
- Both.
Furthermore, the law mandates that if the breach involves an act of violence, the court must impose a sentence of full-time detention unless it provides specific reasons otherwise. For many people, an allegation of a domestic violence offence can lead to losing their job, their travel rights, and their reputation. This is why securing a NoConviction Section 10 in NSW or a complete dismissal is so vital.
But here is the question: Is an allegation alone enough to prove a crime?
The Case Study: Mr. K’s Story
Mr. K was charged with one count of contravening a prohibition in an interim ADVO. The prosecution alleged that on a Saturday morning in February 2026, Mr. K made three telephone calls to the Person in Need of Protection (PINOP).
The calls came from a “No Caller ID” service. The complainant claimed that she “recognised the voice” as Mr. K’s. She told the police she felt “goosebumps” and was terrified.
The Flaws in the Prosecution Case
When NCL took on Mr. K’s case, our Principal Lawyer, Michael Moussa, immediately identified what he described as a case “remarkable for what it does not contain.”
Under the law, the prosecution must prove every element of an offence beyond reasonable doubt. In a case involving telephone calls, the central issue is identity. How can the police prove it was you on the other end of the phone?
In Mr. K’s matter, the “evidence” was incredibly thin:
- No Recorded Calls: There were no recordings of the conversations.
- No Telecommunications Data: The police had failed to obtain “ping” data or carrier records to show that a call originated from Mr. K’s phone or location.
- The Defendant’s Cooperation: When police first questioned Mr. K, he didn’t just deny the calls he voluntarily handed over his phone. The investigating officer even admitted in the statement: “Mr. K willingly shows his call log… I was unable to locate any calls or messages relating to the victim.”
- The “No Caller ID” Trap: Relying on voice recognition for a 20-second call from an anonymous number is notoriously unreliable.
Have you ever wondered why the police sometimes proceed with a charge even when the evidence is clearly missing? According to BOCSAR (NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research), Domestic Violence Offence Lawyers are seeing an increase in matters where the “prosecution guidelines” regarding the reasonable prospect of conviction seem to be ignored.
The Turning Point: Reliability and Conduct
Our Parramatta criminal lawyers uncovered a sustained pattern of contact initiated by the complainant. Between December 2025 and March 2026, she sent Mr. K numerous messages. They weren’t messages of fear; they were messages of affection. She sent texts saying, “You were the person that showed him what being loved by a dad felt like,” and imploring him, “Please don’t stop loving him.”
These messages created a “substantial tension” with her claim that she lived in fear of Mr. K. In NSW law, if a complainant’s objective conduct contradicts their testimony of fear, it creates significant “reasonable doubt.” This is a tactic often used by a Specialist Traffic Lawyers Sydney when challenging police statements in other contexts, but it is equally powerful in criminal law.
How NCL Won: The Showdown at Court
A critical moment in this case occurred when the prosecution ignored our formal deadline in our representations. Despite the clear evidentiary gaps outlined in our Letter of Representations, the NSW Police failed to respond by the requested date. It wasn’t until the morning ofthe defended hearing that the prosecutor approached Mr. Moussa, stating he finally intended to withdraw the charge.
However, by that stage, the damage was done Mr. K had already incurred the significant expense of preparing for a full day of litigation. Mr. Moussa refused to let the matter rest there; he pushed hard for a costs order, arguing that the police’s failure to act on the representations earlier was unreasonable. The Magistrate agreed, noting that the police had plenty of time to review the deficiencies in their case, and awarded Mr. K the full $9,900.00 in legal costs.
This serves as a powerful reminder: the police are not above the law, and when they act unreasonably, they can be held financially accountable. Rather than just waiting for a trial, our team drafted a comprehensive representation to the NSW Police. This is a formal legal document that points out the evidentiary deficiencies and invites the prosecution to withdraw the charges to avoid a wasted day in court (and a hefty costs order).
In our cost application, our Criminal Lawyers in Sydney argued that:
- There was no objective evidence linking Mr. K to the calls;
- The complainant’s reliability was fundamentally compromised; and
- It was not reasonable to proceed with a case that had no reasonable prospect of conviction.
The police initially hesitated, but after seeing the strength of our arguments and the evidence of the complainant’s own messages, they realised their case was unwinnable.
The Result: $9,900.00 in Costs
On 30 June 2026, at Blacktown Local Court, the charges against Mr. K were withdrawn and dismissed by Judge Tang in Blacktown Local Court.
But we didn’t stop there. Because the prosecution was “unreasonable” in maintaining a case with such obvious flaws, we applied for legal costs under the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW).
The Magistrate agreed. The Court ordered the NSW Police to pay Mr. K $9,900.00 to cover his legal expenses. This is a massive win for justice. It sends a message that the police cannot simply “accept a complainant’s account” without doing their due diligence.
Why Specialist Advice Matters
Mr. K’s case could have ended very differently. If he had used a lawyer who didn’t understand the nuances of Domestic Violence Law or didn’t have the tenacity to fight for a costs order, Mr. K might have felt pressured to “plead guilty” just to get it over with.
At National Criminal Lawyers®, we are proud of our Success Stories. We believe that everyone is entitled to the presumption of innocence.
Discussion Questions for Our Readers:
- Do you think the police should be required to obtain phone records before charging someone with an AVO breach?
- Have you or someone you know ever faced an allegation that was based purely on “voice recognition”?
- Should there be harsher penalties for individuals who make false reports to the police?
Let us know your thoughts in the comments below!
If you are facing a domestic violence charge or an AVO application, don’t leave your future to chance. Contact the team at National Criminal Lawyers® today for a confidential consultation. Remember, just because you are charged, it doesn’t mean you are guilty.
