Dog waste case a waste of public money: court

A man charged for littering after he dropped his dog’s faeces into a police memorial garden south-west of Brisbane under the belief he was “recycling” has lost his appeal.

The man, known only in court documents as “Mathews”, was charged with littering after police claimed he deposited dog excrement into a garden near the Ipswich Police Station in May 2023.

The man had been at the station to report on bail for other offences, when his support dog defecated inside the public foyer of the station.

The Ipswich Police Station. Credit: Fairfax Media

Mathews cleaned up the mess with some paper from his pocket. When he left the station, police claimed he placed the paper and faeces into a police memorial garden near the station’s entrance, according to the documents.

He pleaded not guilty, and claimed he had not littered, as he was instead engaged in recycling or fertilising. He also claimed the garden was not a memorial.

The case went to trial, where the court heard the man had significant brain injuries from several accidents. He had diagnoses of paranoid schizophrenia and other disorders that affected his ability to organise his thoughts.

“Although, he has been able to obtain four degrees, including a Bachelor of Laws,” court documents state.

The sentencing magistrate convicted Mathews of the offence, but it not be recorded and imposed no further punishment.

She noted that the case was pursued by the prosecution in circumstances where the offender had a significant acquired brain injury, necessitating a lengthy trial process involving four days of hearings.

“I note that Mr Mathews has been declared a vexatious litigant and was clearly charged – had been charged with more serious matters for which he was reporting on bail at the time of this offence,” she said during sentencing.

“The offence clearly falls within the minor category of littering.

“Throughout this hearing, I’ve had significant concerns as a consequence of those features as to the prosecution ongoing assessment of the public interest, particularly regarding the expenditure of significant public funds, particularly with respect to police resources, to reach a conclusion in this matter.”

Mathews appealed the decision on several grounds, including that the charge was brought in bad faith by police and otherwise an abuse of process. He also claimed that the sentencing magistrate erred in not finding that he was recycling the dog faeces in accordance with the relevant environmental laws.

He also made claims he was unnecessarily targeted by police, and made allegations of “Catholic corruption”.

The appeal was dismissed by Judge Dominique Grigg, who found that all grounds of appeal had failed. Grigg made no orders as to costs.

Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.

Most Viewed in National

Loading