Woman loses PVRO bid against cop for herself and her cat

A Darwin woman who claimed a senior police officer hurled foul-mouthed abuse at her has had a bid to take out a restraining order against him knocked back.

A DARWIN woman who claimed a senior police officer hurled foul-mouthed abuse at her has had a bid to take out a restraining order against him knocked back in the Darwin Local Court.

Caitlyn Antella applied for a personal violence restraining order against NT Police Commander James O’Brien in June last year on behalf of herself and her cat, Daniel M.

In dismissing the application last month, judge Greg Macdonald said despite “hostility and animus” between the pair over many years, “only two incidents could possibly give rise to an objective basis for the making of a PVRO”.

In the first incident in February 2019, Ms Antella was in a public thoroughfare adjacent to Mr O’Brien’s property, gathering information she believed would help her to cross examine a witness at an upcoming court hearing.

Caitlyn Antella applied for a PVRO for herself and her cat.

Mr Macdonald said the exercise “included the use of the balls of wool and at least one pair of scissors to obtain measurements of distance”.

An interaction between the pair ensued in which Mr O’Brien arrested Ms Antella and while Mr Macdonald found “aspects of that incident are of definite concern”, the police officer was later cleared of any wrongdoing after claiming she had threatened him with the scissors.

An assault charge laid against Ms Antella over the incident was later withdrawn.

Then in December 2020, Ms Antella claimed a person drove past her, yelling out “slut”.

“The applicant did not see the person who uttered the insult, and had no specific evidence concerning the make or registration of the vehicle, but was adamant that at the time, she ‘noticed his voice, his motor vehicle and his vehicle number plate’,” Mr Macdonald said.

Then about half an hour later, Ms Antella claimed she heard someone say “f***head” as she approached Mr O’Brien’s residence while he was sitting on his veranda.

“The evidence did not include that the applicant saw the defendant speak that insult, so also lacked precision and detail,” Mr Macdonald said.

Mr O’Brien denied those allegations saying “I do not use language like this towards Ms Antella and I do not engage with Ms Antella in any way”.

Jamie O'Brien denied verbally abusing Ms Antella.

In his ruling, Mr Macdonald said he had “no doubt someone directed derogatory and abusive terms” towards Ms Antella and she “genuinely believes the defendant was responsible”.

But he said a “crucial consideration” was whether the foul language could amount to harassment and “in my view, it could not”.

“There is clearly an ongoing ill-will between the applicant and defendant, however it is not my conclusion that if the offensive words were proven to be spoken by the defendant, the words, per se, would amount to ‘harassment’ in the circumstances,” he said.

“It is my conclusion that the applicant’s safety is not appreciably at risk and a clear need for ‘protection’ from the defendant is not indicated or required.”

Mr Macdonald also noted the PVRO Act did not extend to the protection of animals.