It’s the psychological damage to parents and community and Cleo. That’s the thing. I know you can sue for that can’t you? For scaring the sh*te outta everyone.Strictly legal - opinion.
I suspect the small amount of charges the police have laid thus far on the alleged perpetrator, would of been on the advice of the public prosecutor in accordance with the irrefutable evidence the police have to date - specifically in relation to the perpetrator's mental ability to understand the charges with little chance for deniability;
"Sir, did you remove Cleo Smith from the tent?" Yes. "Did you seek permission from her parents to do so". No. = child stealing.
The 2nd charge, not being made public for now, 'I suspect' is either false imprisonment or deprivation of liberty. But until there is clear evidence from Cleo's testimony, which may or not be admissible in court, legally speaking, neither of these charges can or should be assumed.
From a general perspective it's obvious and plausible that the perpetrator held this child captive in an environment conducive to physical and mental endangerment, but/but - is there actually any evidence she was physically harmed, restrained or threatened in any way..?
While clearly Cleo was not with him voluntarily, as much as we don't want to admit/accept this, Terry Kelly's legal defense may well argue this point..