A stand alone alleged breach of 149 if proven carries a 50 point penalty, so to get a Judge sufficiently interested in issuing a search and seizure warrant you'd have to 'spice it up a bit' otherwise no warrant. I think it would be hard to get a 'conviction' on this item. It's not illegal under the FAR, happens all over the world regularly, willing participant and it is an event for which CASA may issue an approval. So scratch bait towing from the list of heinous crimes and assign it to the naughty boy pile, (a fine perhaps). Whether it was foolhardy or not don't signify much; Mum went ballistic but his mates thought it well cool. The CASA hysterical screams of reckless and negligent seem to fade away a little about now.
Now this one is sinister:-
It is alleged that between August 2009 & August 2010, Mr Milton Jones was the pilot in command of Robinson R22 and Robinson R44 helicopters and performing commercial operations (collection of crocodile eggs) for which a commercial helicopter licence is required when he was only the holder of a private helicopter licence.
I expect the crocodile community and the local green welly mob are grateful for CASA safety concerns in the airspace surrounding their habitat. That said we are back to the PP regulations defining what is or is not a 'commercial' operation. Now the FAR are tough on people conducting a pre determined 'commercial' operation with a PPL. The great egg hunt may or may not 'technically' be illegal under Gods Own Rules, but again stand alone what is it. I doubt it is sufficient grounds for 'his honour' to issue serious paper work, more like he'd sling 'em out of his court.
This proceeding raises for consideration whether there was a proper basis for the issue of a warrant to seize material. This, in turn, necessitates an examination of the provisions of 32 AF Act1988 An answer will then be provided to the following question: did the second respondent Magistrate have a sufficient basis for being satisfied that there were reasonable grounds for suspecting that there was a particular thing on certain premises that may afford evidence of the commission of a civil aviation offence? For reasons that follow the answer to that question is, yes.
Depends on how the information was provided to the layman I should imagine. But when the Daemon of myth and legend "The Safety Monster" raises it's head seems all bets are off.