The 57-year-old male – recognized only as GJC in South Australian Civil and Administrative Tribunal paperwork – has missing an enchantment to have the ban overturned.
That is inspite of the Director of Community Prosecutions withdrawing felony costs towards the male above the incidents.
A judgment not long ago published by the tribunal stated the Adelaide tennis instructor sent the lady many text messages, frequently termed her and had two prolonged cellphone discussions on July 3, 2017.
The lady was “distressed” by what transpired and her spouse and children documented it to law enforcement.
According to the judgment, law enforcement statements from the lady showed she stated the discussions have been about “matters of a sexual nature”.
He denied the allegation and stated he contacted the lady simply because he thought she had stolen $two hundred from his tennis bag.
The Office of Human Services’ central assessment unit approved the girl’s variation of situations and subsequently located he posed an unacceptable risk to little ones.
The man’s law firm argued to the tribunal that “second hand hearsay” – the law enforcement report – ought to not be applied to assess irrespective of whether he posed a risk to little ones.
The department submitted that “unacceptable risk” was unique to felony and lawful benchmarks of guilt and ought to not be handled the exact way.
Tribunal senior member Jacqui Rugless located that, no matter of the material of the cellphone calls, it was “clear” the male had “no regret or insight into the harm that he may have triggered to the youngster by his admitted conduct of texting and persistently telephoning her”.
She stated was not probably GJC would “cause harm to a youngster in the future”, however, there was a “possibility”.
“ … the potential consequences to little ones would be critical if the perceived risk eventuated,” she stated.
Twitter abide by Caleb