>>515668857
For the false report allegation, section 53 requires proof that you made a report to police and that the report contained a falsehood you knew was false when made. A forum post that police happen to read is not, in itself, a report to police. The prosecution must point to a communication by you to police, identify its recipient, timing, medium, and words, and then prove falsity and knowledge. If they suggest others acted on your words, they must prove agency or authorisation and causation; in practice that means identifying the caller, the content of the call, and why it should legally be treated as your act. The correct way to address this is to demand particulars that identify any communication by you to police and to require the supporting material such as recordings or logs. If there is no communication by you to police, the section 53 theory fails on its own terms and counsel should press for withdrawal. At the same time, procedure supplies leverage. The search must have been issued and executed under section 465 of the Crimes Act. There should be sworn information supporting the warrant, an inventory left at the premises, and a report of execution filed with the court under section 465AAC. Device access is controlled by statute. Compulsion exists only if a direction to assist appears in the warrant under section 465AAA or if a court makes an assistance order under section 465AA. Absent either, passwords are not volunteered. If a direction or order is produced, the safest course is to obtain a copy, note the exact wording, seek legal advice, and comply precisely within its scope if required. Non compliance with an order is a separate offence under the Act, so timing and clarity matter. These are settled statutory requirements and they are reliable tools for exclusion or narrowing where steps have not been followed.