Nathan Cross sues SA Police for exemplary damages, says officers tried to cover up incident in which he was knocked unconscious
He was handcuffed, knocked unconscious inside a police station and later found not guilty of assaulting officers. Now he’s suing, saying they tried to cover it up. Watch all the footage here.
Police & Courts
Don't miss out on the headlines from Police & Courts. Followed categories will be added to My News.
- Man knocked unconscious, charged with assault, then vindicated
- How to get the most out of your Advertiser digital subscription
SA Police tried to cover up their battery of a handcuffed man – who was pushed headfirst into a counter – by maliciously prosecuting him for assaulting them, a lawsuit has asserted.
Nathan Cross has asked the District Court to award him exemplary damages, which are also known as punitive damages, for his injuries and three-year legal battle.
He says four Victor Harbor officers breached their duties not only by breaking his thumb, scarring his face and inflicting a brain injury, but also by their conduct afterwards.
“The imposition of the charge of assault police was done with the sole intention to justify the assault and subsequent cover-up by the officers,” he says in court papers.
“The officers acted in solidarity to minimise their complicity in the assault … they attempted to cover up the assault by providing a series of false and misleading statements.”
Two weeks ago, the Victor Harbor Magistrates Court acquitted Mr Cross, 43, of McCracken, of assaulting Senior Constable Ben Higgins in February 2017.
Mr Cross struck his head on the station’s charge counter after Senior Constable Higgins pushed him – he was handcuffed, barefoot and surrounded by three other officers at the time.
In support of his lawsuit, Mr Cross’ lawyers have tendered more CCTV footage of the incident, showing their bleeding, unconscious client being carried to a padded cell.
He remains there, with a towel under his head, until paramedics are summoned.
In his statement of claim, Mr Cross asserts he has suffered negligence and trespass to his person in addition to battery and malicious prosecution.
“Higgins’ direct act of slamming Mr Cross’ face into the charge counter was intentional … he intended to commit an assault,” the document asserts.
“The force used was clearly disproportionate to the threat, or lack thereof, which was being posed by Mr Cross … (it was) without legal justification.”
It further asserts that, after Mr Cross was knocked unconscious, the officers broke his thumb while trying to remove his jewellery.
Mr Cross asserts his brain injury has affected his “memory, executive functioning, motivation and personality”, leaving him with a greatly-reduced capacity to work.
He asks the court to award him both aggravated and exemplary damages.
The government has yet to file its defence to the claim, telling the court it requires a further four months to do so.
The court declined that request, giving it six weeks to do so and ordered the matter be heard again in December.