Two brothers have been awarded over half a million dollars after the court found that police fabricated evidence against them. The men sued the State for wrongful arrest, false imprisonment, and malicious prosecution.The siblings, who are not being named because of the amount of the award, were charged back in 2019 with possession of marijuana for the purpose of trafficking within 500 metres of a preschool. The offence was dismissed four months later for want of prosecution.On June 14, 2019, police execu­ted a search warrant at the premises of the 27-year-old businessman and property manager and the 36-year-old disc jockey and music producer for arms and ammunition.The businessman stated he was in his brother’s studio editing a vi­deo at 10.30 p.m. when officers entered, pointing guns and shouting for him to freeze. While lying on the ground as instructed, he heard an officer shout out that he had found something and came with a black plastic bag of marijuana.The disc jockey said he was in the upstairs bathroom when the police arrived.Both men accused the police of planting the drugs although they did not see it being done. They claimed they were targeted because of a past dispute their mother had with one of the officers.Both also said they were transported in the boot of a police van to the police station and placed in dirty cells. The disc jockey described the experience as a nightmare which left him scarred. The men were in custody for two days until they were granted station bail.The defence called the brothers’ claim frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of process. They maintained that there was reasonable and pro­bable cause for their arrest, charge and detention, as officers had obtained a valid search warrant follow­ing surveillance of the premi­ses.It was further claimed there were videos of artistes singing in the studio with guns and that residents reported hearing “explosions” coming from the property. The officers contended that they smelt marijuana upon entry and saw one of the men running in the shared studio to place on a ledge an item which was identified as marijuana.The police denied the men were held in insanitary cell conditions and stated that the dismissal of the charge came as the officer was atten­ding another court matter and not due to lack of evidence.Malicious prosecutionJustice Westmin James however found that there were material inconsistencies, contradictions, improbabilities and deficiencies in the defendant’s evidence.This included that the officers said they smelt burning marijuana on entering the premises, but there was no evidence presented of cigarette remnants, ashes, rolling paper, lighters or other items.James found that the narrative concerning the discovery of the marijuana was devised to provide a justification for arrests made after an unsuccessful search for firearms.The court further found that a chase, as stated by the defendant, did not occur given it was a short distance and a number of police officers were present. It was further noted that although the police relied on a theory of joint possession, no explanation was provided over the claimants’ father, who was at the premises, not being charged.James noted, “Even if the court were to leave aside its finding of fabrication, the defendant’s evidence still falls well short of establishing reasonable suspicion.”The court found there was wrong­ful arrest, false imprisonment and malicious prosecution.The men were each awarded $120,000 for malicious prosecution. They were awarded $75,000 for wrongful arrest and false imprisonment and, in relation to these, James noted that the men’s humiliation was compounded by the public nature of the arrest and the likelihood of reputational harm increased given that it occurred within the community.He further accepted that the conditions of detention were unplea­sant and degrading, and the overall conditions increased the indignity and discomfort with their detention.“The court has found that a police officer deliberately fabricated the factual basis for arresting and prosecuting the claimants. That conduct represents an intentional abuse of public power.“Citizens are entitled to expect that police officers will exercise their powers honestly, fairly and only for lawful purposes. The deliberate invention of evidence is fundamentally inconsistent with those obligations and undermines public confidence in the administration of justice.”The court found that exemplary damages in the amount of $50,000 to each brother appropriately reflected the exceptional seriousness of the defendant’s conduct. The brothers were also awarded $7,500 for special damages.The award to each amounted to $252,500, and interest was ordered to be added on all except the exemplary damages. The defendant was also ordered to pay the men’s costs in the sum of $50,304.08.A stay of execution of 28 days was ordered.