46-year-old Australian man Matej Radelic has been found guilty of two counts of aggravated common assault after using cable ties to restrain three children who had trespassed on his property and were found swimming in his backyard pool. The incident, which took place in March 2023 in Broome, a remote town in Western Australia, sparked widespread outrage and media attention, both in Australia and internationally.
The case centered on an episode that began innocuously but quickly escalated. Three young children, aged six, seven, and eight, had entered Mr. Radelic’s property without permission and were discovered swimming in his backyard pool. According to evidence presented in court, Mr. Radelic used cable ties to restrain the children after confronting them, claiming he was making a lawful citizen’s arrest. The images of the children tied up, distressed, and crying, circulated widely in the media, igniting a storm of controversy.
Mr. Radelic faced three charges of aggravated common assault, with the prosecution asserting that his actions were excessively forceful and “dehumanising” given the circumstances. However, his defense argued that he acted lawfully in response to the trespassing and that his actions were reasonable, considering his frustrations with repeated break-ins at his property.
The case presented a complex legal question around the boundaries of a citizen’s arrest and the appropriate use of force in situations involving minors. Mr. Radelic’s lawyer, Seamus Rafferty, argued that his client was entitled to make a citizen’s arrest after the children trespassed on his property and used his swimming pool without permission. He emphasized that Mr. Radelic had been the victim of a series of break-ins in the months leading up to the incident, though there was no evidence that these children were involved in any prior criminal activity.
While Mr. Rafferty conceded that the method of restraining the children—cable-tying their wrists—was “not a good look,” he maintained that it was legal under the circumstances. His defense rested on the claim that Mr. Radelic had only sought to prevent further trespassing and protect his property, and that the use of cable ties was not intended to harm the children.
“This case is not about optics, not about emotion, race or vigilantism,” Mr. Rafferty told the court. He also highlighted notes from a police officer who responded to the scene, describing the incident as a “lawful citizen’s arrest” at the time of their initial assessment.
The prosecution, led by police prosecutor Mícheál Gregg, took a different view, focusing on the disproportionate nature of Mr. Radelic’s response to the situation. While the children had indeed been trespassing, they had complied when asked to exit the pool and sit down, Mr. Gregg argued. As such, the use of cable ties to bind their wrists was excessive and unnecessary.
“The circumstances simply weren’t there to justify any use of force,” Mr. Gregg said during the trial. He underscored that the children had not posed any threat to Mr. Radelic or his property once they had complied with his demands to stop swimming.
Additionally, the prosecutor described the psychological impact on the children, who were left “scared and crying” after being restrained. In an emergency call that was played during the court proceedings, Mr. Radelic himself admitted to the operator that the children were unharmed but frightened.
When police arrived at Mr. Radelic’s home, bodycam footage captured him expressing his frustration at what he saw as the lack of consequences for those who trespassed on his property. “I mean, there’s no consequences for anything,” he said. “What would you do?… If you think I need to go to jail, I will.”
After hearing arguments from both sides, Magistrate Deen Potter found Mr. Radelic guilty of two counts of aggravated common assault. The court agreed that while the children’s actions did constitute “trespass and criminal damage,” they were under the age of criminal responsibility in Western Australia, which is set at 10 years old. Consequently, Mr. Radelic’s actions were deemed an unreasonable and disproportionate response to the situation, despite his frustrations with ongoing break-ins.
Notably, Mr. Radelic was acquitted of one charge relating to the oldest child, who had managed to escape from his restraints more quickly than the others and leave the scene. Magistrate Potter concluded that the restraint of this child was not sustained for a long enough period to justify a conviction on this count.
In sentencing, the magistrate imposed a fine of A$2,000 (approximately $1,368 or £1,041), suspended for 12 months, meaning that Mr. Radelic will avoid further penalties if he does not reoffend during this period.
