Press & Oversight Brief

Reported criminal conduct that was not investigated - and three prosecutions brought instead.

← Full archive at kandykingxcase.com
Q
What happened?

I reported online impersonation, identity theft and harassment to NSW Police from January 2021, with account links, screenshots and financial traces. The reports were not investigated. I was prosecuted three times instead.

I acted as a private whistleblower - documenting conduct I was experiencing, reporting it with evidence to the authority responsible for investigating it, and following up across multiple agencies when those reports produced nothing. This brief is for journalists and oversight bodies.

Key fact: The person I reported has never been charged by Kings Cross PAC. I was prosecuted three times. Two of those prosecutions were dismissed or withdrawn.

In late 2020, before I had filed any formal reports, Surry Hills Police contacted me to say I was attempting to access another person's Windows account. The account was my own - a Windows installation on my own computer that had been renamed to someone else's name and had its password changed. My attempt to recover access triggered a notification that was taken to police. The officer dismissed my explanation, described it as a civil matter, and warned me that attempting to access what he described as the other person's account was a serious offence. That was my first contact with police about the conduct I was experiencing - before I had reported anything.

Q
What were the three prosecutions?

From January 2021 I formally reported impersonation and identity theft to NSW Police (Kings Cross PAC). The person I reported has never been charged by that command.

Prosecution 1 (H85611724 + H392614194, January 2022)
Six charges plus a bail breach - seven matters heard together. Four recording charges dismissed not guilty. Bail breach dismissed not guilty. Two distributing charges: findings of guilt, minimum penalty, $500 each. The convictions were for sending images to the person I had reported - in correspondence in which I told him I had footage of him using drugs and taking property from my room.
Prosecution 2 (H91613788, June 2022) - Dismissed not guilty
Contravene AVO; alleged phone call on 19 June 2022. The prosecution's account: the complainant had a friend answer his phone, and that friend claimed to recognise my voice - but only from a recording the complainant had played him. That friend declined to provide his details to police, declined to make a statement, and did not give evidence at the hearing. Documented in COPS event E89340266. I separately obtained Optus usage records for the prepaid service alleged to have made the call. The records contain no call entries. The officer in charge acknowledged in writing eight days before the hearing that the alleged call was made via Signal and would not appear in Optus carrier records.
Prosecution 3 (H81615839, May 2024 – June 2025) - Withdrawn and dismissed
Use carriage service to menace/harass. Withdrawn and dismissed on 10 June 2025 before Magistrate Milledge at Downing Centre Local Court. Rushton attended but left without giving evidence. The prosecution sought an adjournment; it was refused. The charge was laid on the basis of a phone call that NSW Police had documentary proof did not occur. Telstra carrier records (Item 9, Subscriber/CCR, Total Result Count: 0) had been held 99 days before charging was initiated. Item 7 of the brief index - described as "Documents provided by Victim" - was absent from the brief served on me. Constable Dellenty advised that "upon finalisation of the local court matter some information she had received that was not saved on ViewIMS had been deleted." GIPA 909690 returned "not held" across 13 decision points.

Sources: COPS event E89340266; Optus letter re service 0468828365, 12 July 2022; iMessage from Con Marcel Hammer, 7 August 2022; Brief of Evidence H81615839, Item 9; GIPA 909690; GIPA Internal Review REV-2025-0858525; Wilson Tighe, O'Brien Criminal and Civil Solicitors, 16 June 2025 - all held by Anthony Smith.

Q
Who was involved?

Anthony Smith - reported the conduct, was prosecuted. Train driver 20+ years (Queensland Rail, later Sydney Trains).

@kandykingX - the person reported; subject of the impersonation and identity-theft reports.

The Hon Yasmin Catley MP - NSW Minister for Police; office issued response F/2026/10870.

Cybertrace - forensic provider; report Ref 2025-4663.

LECC - independent police-oversight commission; six files closed.

Inspector of the LECC - oversees the commission; closed C82-2526/A8579640, 19 May 2026.

Police officers and officials are named on the main site only where they acted in official capacity and a documented fact or question attaches to the name.

Q
What evidence exists?

Every claim in this brief is sourced to one of the records below. Unredacted originals are available for review on request.

RefItemWhat it shows
A1Cybertrace report (Ref 2025-4663)Linked an email it attributed to the suspect to a Microsoft account created in my name; made recommendations to police not acted upon
A2Carrier records (Prosecution 3)Nil-result disproving the alleged call (Item 9, Total Result Count: 0), held 99 days before charging; in the brief served on me
A3Carrier records (Prosecution 2)Number never connected to the network; OIC's written concession re app calls
A4GIPA returns (NSW Police)Including the "Not Held" finding on the communication ban and the record-destruction admission (REV-2025-0858525)
A5QLD Health RTI (JIAU25/13749)The cross-border welfare referral and its stated basis
A6Court recordsOutcomes of all three prosecutions (H85611724, H91613788, H81615839)
A7Oversight correspondenceLECC, Inspector of the LECC, Ministerial and command closure letters
Q
What did oversight do?
Every tier of NSW oversight has closed the matter without engaging the documentary record.

This includes:

  • The LECC - six files closed.
  • The Inspector of the LECC - closed C82-2526/A8579640, decision of Bruce McClintock SC, 19 May 2026.
  • The Minister for Police - whose office returned the correspondence to the police force it concerned (response F/2026/10870).

The AHRC complaint and IPC reviews remain open. Federal ministerial correspondence is pending.

This site does not ask you to assume motive. It asks whether the documented decisions warrant independent scrutiny.
Q
What are the key dates?
DateEvent
2021–2022Impersonation / identity-theft reports to Kings Cross PAC; not investigated
Jan 2022Prosecution 1 commenced (H85611724)
Aug 2022Prosecution 2 dismissed - not guilty after hearing (H91613788)
16 Nov 2022I relocated to Queensland; later reports handled cross-border
Feb 2024Carrier nil-result obtained (99 days before charging in Prosecution 3)
May 2024Prosecution 3 charged (H81615839)
Apr 2025Cybertrace forensic report commissioned and provided to police
10 Jun 2025Prosecution 3 withdrawn and dismissed
Jun 2025Cross-border welfare check; no Triple Zero call recorded in GIPA returns
Jan–Feb 2026Ministerial correspondence; police self-response F/2026/10870
19 May 2026Inspector of the LECC closes complaint C82-2526/A8579640
Q
What's being asked now, and how do I make contact?

Unredacted originals of the records summarised here are available for review on request. The site publishes redacted versions only; private citizens' details are removed.

Contact: contact@kandykingxcase.com

Other individuals have contacted me describing comparable experiences with the same command and complaint pathways. With their consent, introductions can be made.