Source: Sunday Times (Australia)
Contact:  Sun, 24 May 1998 

CASE OF MISTAKEN IDENTITY

ON Saturday, September 13, last year, the front door bell rang at Brian
Knight's Athelstone home.

Staggering half asleep from bed, the retired bank manager then heard a
pounding on the door. He opened it, a foot was shoved inside and five
plainclothes' police outside told Brian Knight his house was being searched
for drugs.

So began an eight-month frustrating fight for rights, justice and an
apology. It isn't over yet.

The irony is that what happened to Brian Knight, 55, his wife, Teresa, and
their two children is no one's fault.

The police aren't to blame - they were doing their job - and the
law-abiding Knights certainly are blameless.

But, as Mr Knight puts it, "the system is stuffed. There's no check or
accountability."

Detectives, in their battle against the SA drug trade, came upon Brian
Knight after his name was dropped by an "informer". Specifically, it wasn't
Mr Knight's name, but that of his wife, who had an Italian name from a
previous marriage (she became widowed and married Brian) which was the same
as a known Adelaide man known to police.

Mrs Knight is not related to the person police were interested in.

However, the old name was flagged on a computer check.

Police checked the address and, coincidentally, found the Knights had an
unusually high power bill. Police surveillance also revealed the family had
a shade cloth over potted shrubs in the back garden.

A heat-seeking helicopter had done fly-overs, but there had been no flash
of heat - indicating hydroponics - from the Knight house.

Police believed, however, there was enough evidence to make the Athelstone
house the target of the Saturday morning drug raid.

"I stood at the door and stared in disbelief at five people looking
straight at me," Mr Knights recalled.

"I yelled at my wife 'call the cops!'.

"The five outside yelled back 'we are the cops!, they flashed a badge and
apparently had a search warrant."

"The first feelings of shock passed and I allowed them in."

Brian Knight is a fastidious, proper and orderly man.

Every cent from his redundancy has gone into the two-storey Athelstone
home, including the immaculately tiled foyer and main room floors.

It was when Brian Knight asked the police to take their shoes off before
the search that things went from bad to worse.

The five detectives would not remove their shoes for health and safety
reasons.

Said Mr Knight: "It was an expensive new floor and I didn't want it
damaged. I didn't think my request was unreasonable."

The police worked their way through the Knight home, upstairs and
downstairs and out into the garden where the shadecloth sheltered not
cannabis plants but Trees for Life.

The drug raid had hit the wrong house and the wrong people.

It had been a mistake. There was an exchange of harsh words, telephone
calls and complaints made over the phone while the police stood in the
kitchen and Brian Knight's shock turned to anger.

Not to put too fine a point on it, the police and the Knights parted that
day on very bad terms.

The Knights were angry. The police were angry and frustrated.

"The whole thing was based on misinformation," Brian Knight said.

"It had not been properly researched or planned. "Look over my fence from
the back block and if there were drug plants there you'd see them.

"Check my wife's former name out and do a title search on the house and you
would find she wasn't related to the so-called Mr Big with the same name.

"We made complaints about the power bill through ETSA months and months
ago, and found out we were using too much power because of the appliances
we have - we've changed to gas.

"There was a stuff-up here, but the system made it worse."

The "system" was the Police Complaints Authority (PCA), the independent
statutory body which considers complaints against police.

Brian Knight was incensed he had become the target of a police drug raid on
the word of a police informant.

"My children, myself and my wife were distressed by this whole thing," he
said.

"We had been targeted by police and our home was seen as a drug dealing
shed. For weeks after I woke up at night sweating, waiting for the slam of
car doors and the bang on the door."

The PCA launched an inquiry, but quickly told the Knights there was nothing
to substantiate a complaint.

Mr Knight complained he had seen, but not been able to verify the search
warrant; the raid was poorly planned and he had not seen a police badge.

The PCA confirmed the warrant was legal, the raid was launched on good
evidence, and police had shown a badge.

The "muddied" tile floor incident also was refuted on the evidence from the
police they had wiped their feet.

There was an exchange of more letters over the next few months and the PCA
continued to investigate. Eventually PCA chief, Anthony Wainwright, wrote:

"As it turned out most of the information supplied by the informant was
incorrect - this does not mean the action taken by police was unlawful or
unreasonable in the circumstances."

"Quite often, when information is received by police which concerns
suspiscious behavior, police are compelled to act on it. This does not mean
all information provided must be accurate - there have been many occasions
when police have pursued a line of inquiry in good faith to later become
aware the information supplied by an informant was inaccurate, vexatious or
provided in good faith in the absence of other details."

In other words, what our police did was lawful and in good faith - but the
information was a dud.

Brian Knight won't wear this. He said: "I have always been a police
supporter, I still am and have met and respected police, in my job as a
bank branch manager, who were good cops doing a hard job."

"But there has to be accountability and a 'sorry' if it's stuffed up.

"The powers provided under a search warrant are huge and the fact a raid
like this can go ahead on such light evidence and false information seems
so wrong."

The search warrant was issued pursuant to section 52 of the Controlled
Substances Act after it was confirmed "there are reasonable grounds for
suspecting an offence against this Act has been, or is being, or is about
to be committed".

The Knights' house at Athelstone has plenty of areas in which cannabis
could be cultivated. An amphetamine factory could be built in the roof.

Brian Knight finds it amusing the search, "conducted in an orderly manner",
didn't probe the areas drugs could be found in.

In the end, he concedes the raid was right, but it shouldn't have happened
at his house. He knows he can get no compensation, but doesn't want any.

"I want an apology," Mr Knight claims. "And I don't want this to ever
happen again to anybody." 

- ---
Checked-by: Mike Gogulski