Constable Zachary Rolfe's murder trial told Kumanjayi Walker posed 'low threat' when second and third shots were fired

This is absurd and shows no awareness of the use of firearms in policing.  The key point is that rapidly aimed fire from a handgun  is not very likely to hit its target.  Most shots will go wild.  So the only way of being reasonably sure that the target is hit is to fire multiple rounds in close succession, which is exactly what Rolfe did. 

It is easy to do armchair pontification about rights and wrongs after the event but the police are often confronted with a situation requiring split second decisions, which was the situation here.  The root cause of the death was the deceased's hostility to the police, not the action of the police in response to it

It may be relevant that Const. Rolfe appears to be a little guy who would reasonably be particularly fearful of any physical confrontation

Biomechanical expert Andrew McIntosh on Friday gave evidence in the NT Supreme Court, where Constable Rolfe, 30, has pleaded not guilty to murder and two alternative charges over the fatal shooting in the remote community in November 2019.

Dr McIntosh was asked about the moments after Mr Walker began to struggle with Constable Rolfe and fellow officer Constable Adam Eberl, when the 19-year-old stabbed Constable Rolfe in the shoulder with a pair of medical scissors.

The first shot then fired by Constable Rolfe is not the subject of any charges, but prosecutors argue the second and third shots fired 2.6 and 0.5 seconds later were not legally justified because the threat posed by Mr Walker had been contained.

Dr McIntosh said the body-worn camera footage of the incident showed that after the first shot, Mr Walker and Constable Eberl fell onto a mattress on the floor.

As Mr Rolfe moved towards them with his gun drawn, Dr McIntosh said Constable Eberl could be seen putting his body weight on top of Mr Walker, who was lying on his right side.

Dr McIntosh said this meant Mr Walker's right arm, which was holding the scissors, would likely have been restricted in its movement range.

Under questioning from the prosecution, he agreed that when the second and third shots were fired, Mr Walker was not likely to be a "direct threat" to Constable Rolfe.

He agreed Mr Walker was likely to be a "low threat" to Constable Eberl, because his ability to deploy the scissors was impaired, as his arm was stuck beneath him.

"If you're using a weapon in your hand and your arm is pinned in that way, then it's very difficult to develop force with the weapon that you have because you can't accelerate your arm, reach any velocity, reach any momentum and exert a force onto someone else," Dr McIntosh said.

He said the degree of restriction depended on how much of Mr Walker's right arm was under his own body and that even if only the upper arm was pinned down, his movement would have been "greatly constrained".

Under cross-examination from the defence, Dr McIntosh agreed the body-worn camera footage never showed the extent of control Constable Eberl had on Mr Walker's right forearm, while he was lying on top of him.

Dr McIntosh also agreed that he had the "luxury of slowing down" the vision to make his analysis, which the officers were not able to do during the incident.

"Do you accept that the perception, or perspective, of both officers Eberl and Rolfe, may be quite different from your analysis?" defence barrister David Edwardson QC asked.

"Yes," Dr McIntosh replied.

Forensic pathologist Paull Botterill also took the stand on Friday and told the court the "overwhelming majority of stab and incised wounds" in the general community do not result in death.

But he said Mr Walker's scissors did have the potential to cause a life-threatening injury if they had struck a vulnerable part of the body at a sufficient force.

He added that if Mr Walker's arm movement was restricted, the likelihood of a lethal injury was slim.

"If the limb was not able to freely move, then the only way that an implement such as those scissors could have resulted in a serious life-threatening injury would be if there was movement of the other party, the police officer, up against that immobilised weapon," Dr Botterill said.

"And it's very unlikely to result in a potentially fatal injury."

At the end of Friday's proceedings Crown prosecutor Philip Strickland SC said he would call two more witnesses on Monday and expected to wrap up the prosecution's case on Tuesday morning.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-02-25/nt-police-zachary-rolfe-murder-trial-yuendumu-kumanjayi-low-risk/100862354

Muslim men awarded $61,755 in costs after court played police bodycam vision

Five men who were wrongly accused of assaulting police have been awarded $61,755 in legal costs after a magistrate noted there were “glaring and serious discrepancies” between the police version of events and video footage of the incident.

Khaled Zreika, 21, and Hussein Zraika, 22, had just bought disposable face masks at a petrol station at Guildford in Sydney’s west on September 24 last year when police entered the store and arrested them for failing to wear masks.

The situation rapidly deteriorated when the men followed police outside and questioned why they were being arrested, with the officers from Raptor Squad wrestling the pair to the ground and calling for assistance.

Noah Obeid, 19, Fadi Zraika, 20, and Zachariya Al-Ahmad, 20, who approached police to criticise them for the arrest, were also arrested as scores of officers responded.

The five were charged with various offences including assaulting police, harassing police, hindering police and resisting arrest, however all charges were later withdrawn apart from a breach of the public health order.

On Thursday, Magistrate Greg Grogin said it was “abundantly clear” there was a “major” discrepancy between vision of the incident and the officers’ claims.

He found the proceedings against the men were initiated without reasonable cause, and ordered police pay $61,755.80 of legal costs.

Police had earlier conceded there was no reasonable cause to bring the charges and agreed to pay costs, but argued the amount sought by the men was manifestly excessive.

In bodycam footage played to Parramatta Local Court on Thursday, Constable James Katsetis and Constable Dylan Leyshon from Raptor Squad can be seen walking into the service station, with one of the officers greeting the men by saying “hey brother, how you going”.

“No mask, both you boys,” Constable Katsetis continues. “You’re both under arrest ... can you hop outside for us?”

The officer, who initially admonishes Hussein Zraika for swearing in a public place, is depicted a short time later wrestling with him on the ground before telling him, “you f---ing move, I’ll knock you out c--t”.

Constable Katsetis then moves to where Khaled Zreika is being restrained nearby and knees him multiple times, causing him to shout in pain, before telling him: “don’t f---ing move c--t”.

Mr Grogin said lawyers representing the men had criticised the actions of police, but the award of costs could not be viewed as being a punishment.

“The fact that costs are not punitive does not require this court to come to a decision as to the actions of the police on the day,” he said. “Suffice to say, a picture paints a thousand words.”

Mr Grogin said he had viewed the facts sheets prepared by police, as well as CCTV footage and bodycam vision, and “there are obvious, glaring and serious discrepancies, to my eyes”.

“It would be obvious to anybody involved with the criminal law and the criminal courts the reason why these charges were withdrawn,” he said. “To say that the video showed nothing but a very serious physical altercation between police and the defendants would be an understatement.”

Police prosecutor Lachlan Kirby told the court he has not been informed why charges against the five men were withdrawn, but there is a “clear inference, having watched that footage, that this matter was not going to end in favour of the prosecution”.

“I’m drawing the same inference as everyone else as to the reason the matters were withdrawn” Senior Sergeant Kirby said. “I’m not an idiot.”

Mr Grogin said the lawyer for the men, Abdul Saddik, began to carry out his own investigation including sourcing CCTV from the petrol station due to fears the footage would not be disclosed by police.

“It would appear his concerns were well-founded,” Mr Grogin said.

The court heard police did not serve a brief of evidence containing CCTV or statements, in defiance of a court deadline, before the charges were withdrawn. Some documents were given to the men for the first time on Thursday.

Mr Grogin said the costs proceeding was “not a forum for criticism” or the “airing of grievances” and “I am not determining the actions of anybody, particularly any police officers involved”.

It is understood that lawyers for the men will ask for police to investigate the officers’ actions and consider criminal charges. If this is not done, the lawyers will consider a private prosecution.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/men-paid-61-755-in-costs-after-court-played-police-bodycam-vision-20220210-p59vga.html

Bungles by NSW police officers cost $30m a year

Assault, battery, trespass and unlawful imprisonment and other cases against NSW police are costing $30 million a year.

NSW police bungles are costing more than $30 million a year in damages and compensation payouts to members of the public claiming to have been mistreated.

The number of successful claims involving police in New South Wales reached almost 400 in the past financial year – the highest level in five years and included assault, battery, unlawful imprisonment, malicious prosecution and trespass

More than $148 million has been paid since 2016 – an average of more than $80,000 a day – for more than 1600 incidents, sparking calls to overhaul police training and the “woke” police leadership.

Answers to Questions on Notice in NSW state parliament have revealed that during the pandemic year 2020-2021, police paid out $32,972,561 for 398 incidents, a jump of 100 incidents from 2019-2020 when $24,164,658 was paid out for 298 claims.

In comparison, Queensland for the same period paid out only $2,281,850 million, although the force has about 12,000 officers and NSW has about 17,000.

Retired detective sergeant turned One Nation MP Rod Roberts, said the consistency of the payouts every year showed the problems in NSW Police were “systemic” and had been ongoing for years.

“Police are a law enforcement body. Not social workers. To enforce the law they need to know the law, which by these figures they do not,” said Mr Roberts.

“We need to support our frontline officers and the first step in this is ensuring that they receive the appropriate training to enable them to perform their roles professionally,” he said.

NSW Police Acting Deputy Commissioner Corporate Services, Paul Pisanos said, “There is a myriad of reasons why civil claims are brought against the NSW Police Force, and to suggest that training – or lack thereof – is the cause is incorrect.”

The claim costs, including legal expenses for defending the police, are paid for by the NSW Police Force insurer.

The compensation amounts were revealed after questions in the NSW parliament and showed the categories of claims spanned intimidation, injurious falsehood, collateral abuse of process, negligence, trespass, misfeasance in public office.

Last year police were told they would not be held to account if they issued tickets wrongly for Covid breaches.

Mr Roberts said the management and leadership of the police in the past had been “too woke”.

“This is evidence they are not being trained properly and are being taught too much woke political correctness,” he said.

“The police are not getting the bread-and-butter education they need and the taxpayer is paying for it.

“The way we can be protected is for police to be aware of their powers.”

The call for better police training comes after criticism of plans by NSW Police to train 315 officers to become special gay and lesbian liaison officers for a huge World Pride event next year.

One Nation MP Mark Latham said the number was disproportionate and police should instead consider special training for dealing with housing estate and elderly residents.

https://www.couriermail.com.au/news/national/bungles-by-nsw-police-officers-cost-state-30m-a-year/news-story/0e6cbe0140b0933a6e51374ba5be9ffc

Australia's Gestapo State: Police stop Catholic mass to check masks

Churchgoers have been left stunned after a police officer stopped a Catholic mass on Thursday to check parishioners were wearing masks.

Police halted the service at St Bernadette’s Glendalough church midway through the priest addressing the congregation following a tip off that people were not wearing masks.

Masks are currently required to be worn at all public indoor setting across Perth and the Peel, South West, Wheatbelt and Great Southern regions.

Five people were found to not be wearing masks, one of which had an exemption while the four others were made to put them on.

The incident was shared to Facebook by a parishioner, who wrote “a policeman allowed himself in, strutting up the aisle demanding correct mask behaviour and checking exemptions.”

“Where have we seen this behaviour before in history?

Police said in a statement they responded to a report from a member of the public of people not wearing masks inside a church in Mount Hawthorn.

“Upon attendance, 5 people were spoken to by police and complied in wearing a mask,” they said. “One person provided proof of an exemption.”

Catholic Archdiocese of Perth archbishop Tim Costelloe said it is “highly regrettable” that police felt obliged to intervene during the service to enforce the mask rules.

“It is my hope that other ways can be found to deal with this delicate issue in future and my office stands ready to cooperate with the police in this matter,” he said.

“It is the formal and very public policy of the Archdiocese of Perth to do everything it can to facilitate compliance with all the government’s requirements in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic.

“It is a matter of regret to me that the police were placed in a position which led them to take the action they did.”

The church has since shared a message to its Facebook page reminding all parishioners that they cannot enter the place of worship without a mask.

The interruption left churchgoers stunned, with one audience member saying it was “confronting” to see an officer in the church.

“Everyone was pretty stunned, it was confronting,” parishioner Matthew told 6PR Radio. “It’s troubling to see the liturgy you love stopped by police.”

https://7news.com.au/news/wa/community-furore-after-police-stop-st-bernadettes-glendalough-church-service-to-check-masks-c-5567846

Qld. Police have been warned they could face disciplinary or legal action for posting criticisms of the government or politicians on social media

Free speech?

Police have been warned they could face disciplinary or legal action for posting criticisms of the government or politicians on social media, with a new policy being sent out to officers.

The social media policy says Queensland police must not post criticisms of respective parties or policies that raise questions about the officer‘s capacity to work “professionally, effectively or impartially”.

It also bans them for posting or publishing derogatory comments about police service policies, procedures, operations and activities, as well as partner agencies.

The new policy comes after Commissioner Katarina Carroll unleashed on rogue officers making offensive social media comments about fellow officers and members of parliament, launching an investigation into “deeply concerning, nasty and defamatory” material.

In July she told officers she was investigating inappropriate content on external social media pages linked to current and former Queensland Police Service members.

One of the Facebook groups was understood to be Defend the Blue – a private group for police officers who used it to express frustrations with the government or the service hierarchy.

“Members may be subject to disciplinary and/or legal action for improper use of social media in a personal and non-work related capacity including, but not limited to, when using their own name, a version of it, a person or persons name/s which is not their own (with or without permission) and/or pseudonym/s,” the new policy says.

“A claim of anonymity may be irrelevant.”

The new policy has also told officers to put on the highest privacy settings possible on social media and warned them that messages sent in a private capacity in Messenger or WhatsApp could still result in dismissal.

It said officers could not create or manage unofficial social media police groups, pages or accounts and that personal or corporate accounts must not be used to “establish or pursue an improper relationship with any current or former victim, offender or witness”.

Bond University professor Terry Goldsworthy, a former police detective, said officers now had to be “apolitical” without engaging in any commentary.

He said the social media policy change was necessary and would “eradicate the keyboard warriors”.

“It’s risk management, they’ve been caught short with that Facebook group and now what they’ve done is put out a comprehensive policy that captures just about anything,” Mr Goldsworthy said.

“It would suggest that now if you are a police officer you wouldn’t want to be putting up any posts that has any kind of commentary or politics or government policy at all.

“I think the service had to do it, it’s all encompassing and it’s very limiting,” he said.

“The job of police is to enforce the mandate of the government which is duly elected by the people, it’s not there to offer commentary of it and if they’ve got issues or critiques they can be dealt with internally.”

https://www.couriermail.com.au/truecrimeaustralia/police-courts-qld/qld-police-warned-over-posting-criticisms-of-the-government-or-politicians-on-social-media/news-story/4bfa74106aa9a8c272b6c78a4734fea5