- in Australia
A 50-year-old man from Double Bay was scheduled to appear before Parramatta Local Court on the 25th of October 2025 following an investigation by the Australian Federal Police (AFP) that allegedly uncovered a substantial collection of counterfeit law enforcement paraphernalia, prohibited firearms, and illicit drugs, a case that underscores complex legal issues surrounding the impersonation of public officials and the possession of replica weapons in New South Wales.
Investigation Triggered by Badge Hand-In
The AFP investigation was initiated on 23 September 2025, after a member of the public surrendered an AFP badge and identification card to Bondi Police Station. Officers discovered a small quantity of cocaine concealed within the identification, prompting the commencement of a formal inquiry.
Subsequent investigative work identified the individual allegedly linked to the badge. On 24 October 2025, AFP officers executed a search warrant at his Double Bay residence, where they reportedly seized:
- Hats and t-shirts bearing AFP insignia;
- Four replica firearms;
- Eleven high-grade gel blasters;
- Fraudulent identification purporting to represent multiple law enforcement agencies;
- Quantities of anabolic steroids and approximately 14 grams of cocaine.
Charges and Legal Implications
The accused has been formally charged with:
- Possession of prohibited firearms-specifically gel blasters and replica firearms-contrary to section 7(1) of the Firearms Act 1996 (NSW);
- Supplying an indictable quantity of a prohibited drug, contrary to section 25 of the Drugs Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW);
- Impersonating a Commonwealth public official, contrary to section 148.1(2) of the Criminal Code (Cth).
The impersonation charge carries a maximum penalty of two years' imprisonment, reflecting the gravity with which the law regards the deliberate misrepresentation of public authority.
The Law on Impersonating Commonwealth Officials
Section 148.1(2) of the Criminal Code (Cth) criminalises the act of impersonating a Commonwealth public official with intent to deceive. Importantly, the offence does not require any resultant harm; the mere act of falsely presenting oneself as an officer or agent of the Commonwealth constitutes a criminal act.
The statutory purpose is clear: public confidence in law enforcement is foundational to societal safety. Detective Superintendent Peter Fogarty of the AFP emphasised that such conduct "poses a genuine danger to public safety" and will be met with rigorous enforcement.
Replica Firearms and Public Safety
The alleged seizure in this case included replica firearms and gel blasters. While these items are often perceived as harmless toys, under New South Wales law, they carry significant legal consequences.
Section 4D of theFirearms Act 1996 (NSW) defines a firearm broadly, including any imitation capable of being mistaken for a real weapon. This means that realistic-looking replicas, gel blasters, or airsoft guns are legally treated with the same seriousness as actual firearms when possessed or used without lawful authority.
Penalties for Possession Without Authorisation
Possessing a replica firearm without the required permits or lawful reason can attract penalties comparable to those for actual firearms. These penalties may include:
- Imprisonment: Maximum custodial sentences can range from several years to more than a decade for serious offences, depending on the type of firearm, quantity, or accompanying criminal intent.
- Fines: Courts can impose substantial financial penalties to reflect the seriousness of the offence and deter misuse.
- Criminal Record: Convictions carry long-term consequences, including a permanent criminal record, which can impact employment and travel.
Aggravating Factors:
The penalties can increase if the replica firearms are:
- Used in the commission of another offence, such as robbery or impersonation of law enforcement.
- Modified to appear more realistic or combined with actual firearms.
- Carried in public or in circumstances likely to cause fear or alarm.
Rationale for Strict Penalties
The law treats replicas seriously because the risk to public safety is not hypothetical. In high-pressure situations, police or members of the public cannot reliably distinguish a gel blaster or replica from a genuine firearm. This uncertainty can lead to:
- Police using lethal force mistakenly, believing the threat to be real.
- Public panic or defensive actions that result in injury or death.
- Criminal exploitation of replicas to intimidate or commit offences, including impersonating officers.
By imposing penalties comparable to those for real firearms, the law emphasises prevention, deterrence, and public safety, acknowledging that the danger arises from perception as much as from actual firepower.
Need Legal Assistance?
If you or someone you know is facing charges of a criminal offence, speak with a Parramatta Criminal lawyers.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.