A LAKE Macquarie woman who claimed she was discriminated against by police because she was transgender had her case dismissed as ‘‘lacking in substance’’ by the Administrative Decisions Tribunal.
Shaye Rasmussen, of Chain Valley Bay North, initially complained to the Anti-Discrimination Board after she was arrested and charged with assault in January last year, the tribunal found recently.
Rasmussen later pleaded guilty to assaulting her brother and assaulting police and then complained that police discriminated against her on the grounds of her transgender status.
Her complaint to the Anti-Discrimination Board was dismissed and she appealed to the tribunal.
She told the tribunal of three she thought if she called police and admitted to assaulting her brother then he might be somehow forced to leave the home that they were sharing with other family members, the tribunal heard.
Instead, she struggled with one of the officers and was arrested and taken to a police station where she was charged and later bailed.
She was later placed on a good behaviour bond without a conviction being recorded.
Rasmussen said she asked to speak to a gay liaison officer while at the station, but her request was not met.
She claimed police discriminated against her in several ways, including: not seeking her version of events after she made the call; using excessive and unnecessary force to arrest her; kicking her dog; punching her and tackling her; not allowing her to change into street clothes; laughing at her discomfort in the van during the ride to the police station; and forcing her to travel home on public transport in ‘‘physically revealing pyjamas’’.
The tribunal ruled her claim was unsuccessful because it did not meet the requirements of the anti-discrimination legislation nor was discrimination demonstrated.
‘‘The tribunal finds that there is no evidence that [Rasmussen] was treated less favourably than a person who was not of transgender status in the same circumstances on the basis of her transgender status,’’ the tribunal said in its decision.
‘‘In these circumstances the tribunal would dismiss the application as lacking in substance.’’