That was Magistrate James Lawton's view as he dismissed all charges laid against Mason Craig, whose "fundamental human rights" were breached when he was chased down and Tasered.

Mr Craig, 26, was charged over an early morning August 2020 incident with assaulting and resisting First Constable Michael Witteveen, resisting First Constable Steven Dolley, and remaining in the vicinity of Fiction nightclub after being turned out.

It was alleged that he had refused to leave the Civic venue prior to a confrontation with First Constable Witteveen, to whom he said words to the effect of "F--- you, Motorola", in a reference to the brand of the officer's police radio.

In the ACT Magistrates Court on Tuesday, Mr Lawton said he had been able to "comfortably infer" Mr Craig had merely intended to retrieve his jacket from the nightclub and go.

He was not satisfied the Macgregor man planned to remain in the vicinity, meaning there was no case to answer in relation to the failing to quit a licensed premises charge.

Describing the evidence captured on police bodycams and nearby CCTV cameras as powerful and compelling, the magistrate found First Constable Witteveen had grabbed Mr Craig forcefully by the arm in response to the latter's profanity.

The officer made no attempt to state the reason for this apparent arrest, meaning Mr Craig was perfectly entitled to break free and run as he did.

Video captured by First Constable Witteveen's bodycam shows Mr Craig slipping and falling outside Gus' Cafe, where the pair collided and the 26-year-old briefly tackled the officer.

First Constable Witteveen gave evidence last month that he had believed Mr Craig was going to "bash my head in", and that he was "very scared" until his colleagues arrived to assist him.

On Tuesday, Mr Lawton said the officer had broken free of the tackle after perhaps not even one second, with the first constable's colleagues reaching the scene almost immediately.

The magistrate described what happened next as therefore being "particularly disturbing".

He said the bodycam footage showed First Constable Witteveen applying his Taser multiple times to Mr Craig, whose "screams of pain" could clearly be heard.

First Constable Dolley also used his electrical weapon on the 26-year-old, who was hit in the face, too, with capsicum spray by another of the various officers who had converged on the scene.

First Constable Witteveen called Mr Craig a "f---head" a number of times while restraining the Macgregor man.

MORE COURT AND CRIME NEWS:

The assault and resisting police charges stemmed from what Mr Lawton said was in fact Mr Craig "thrashing about" in response to the pain of being Tasered, and spitting in a reaction to the effects of pepper spray.

This was not illegal, he found, because "the defendant was responding to a continuing, unlawful assault" perpetrated by police.

The magistrate ruled that even if police had been making a lawful arrest during the physical struggle outside the cafe, the level of force they used could not have been justified.

Mr Lawton accordingly dismissed the remaining charges and awarded Mr Craig legal costs.

"It has often been said that a picture is worth a thousand words," he said in reference to the bodycam footage proving crucial to his findings.

Mr Craig's lawyer, Michael Kukulies-Smith, said outside court his client was "very relieved and grateful that justice has been done".

"It's very disturbing, as Magistrate Lawton found, that police have exercised their powers so inappropriately," he said.

Mr Kukulies-Smith said the ruling boded well for the rule of law, though he was concerned First Constable Witteveen had given evidence that no disciplinary action had been taken against him.

"We're calling on the chief police officer to immediately stand [First] Constable Witteveen down from duties, and conduct a full inquiry into his disturbing abuse of police powers," Mr Kukulies-Smith said.

An ACT Policing spokesman said the matter was being reviewed as a result of Mr Lawton's comments and the outcome of the court case.

"ACT Policing has clear procedures relating to the appropriate treatment of people and does not tolerate excessive force used by officers during arrest," the spokesman said.

"Officers who are found to have engaged in such conduct following internal investigations may be subject to internal sanctions and the possibility of dismissal."

Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content: