A Canberra media company co-owner was not acting aggressively towards or resisting police during his arrest but was instead "a large man who is heavily intoxicated", his barrister has argued.
Michael James McGoogan, 37, has denied two counts of aggravated assault occasioning actual bodily harm and a single count of resisting a territory public official.
The co-owner of Region Media, publisher of Riotact, stepped aside from his role as co-chief executive in May.
He is fighting the family violence charges in an ACT Magistrates Court hearing expected to last two days. It has now been adjourned until the end of October.
Magistrate Robert Cook indicated he would at that time deal with a non-publication order which has prevented the reporting of much evidence from the hearing so far.
On Wednesday, one of the officers who arrested McGoogan in April described the man as intoxicated, "quite confronting and aggressive", and said "he didn't seem to understand the severity of the situation".
He said during the second of two incidents involving police that month, him and his colleague were forced to use an "AFP approved escort hold" and a "reasonable amount of force to move him down the hallway as he was not doing it himself".
That was, the acting sergeant said, after McGoogan had tried to walk through officers into his apartment, repeatedly resisted them as they cuffed him, and said: "I will resist."
"He was actively pushing against our hands," the officer said.
But in cross-examination, defence barrister James Walker pressed the acting sergeant about whether a clearly intoxicated McGoogan had actually acted aggressively and resisted them.
Mr Walker proposed an "equally obvious and innocent" explanation was "this is a very large, drunk man entering his apartment and not coming to a stop as easily as he might otherwise".
The officer's version of events did not "allow for surprise" or take into account that placing McGoogan under arrest might have been painful or uncomfortable for him, the court heard.
The barrister also questioned how McGoogan moving his arm forwards while being handcuffed, or trying to "break loose", as the officer said in the witness box, amounted to resisting.
Mr Walker proposed the officer had made the assumption the man was trying to free himself.
"It would be very difficult to make any other assumption," the acting sergeant responded, before conceding his evidence was nothing more than an assumption.
The court also heard that many of McGoogan's remarks, including that he was a "very violent person", were sarcastic, not literal, and said while he stood still and amongst several nonsensical, "strange comments".
"I wasn't going to take any chances," the arresting officer told the court.
"My primary concern was the safety of myself and the safety of my constables."
Ultimately, police evidence was that McGoogan was not compliant and pushed against officers walking him down to a car tasked with transporting him to the watch house.
The magistrate is set to determine if that version of events accurately matched police body-worn camera footage played for the court again on Wednesday.
"I'm prepared to be locked up," the accused man said in the video.
The hearing continues.
- Support is available for those who may be distressed. Phone Lifeline 13 11 14; MensLine 1300 789 978; 1800-RESPECT 1800 737 732; ACT Domestic Violence Crisis Service 6280 0900.
