Police and Prosecution Misconduct

Award winning high profile Criminal barrister

"We've seen cases where there's been massive non- disclosure, or simple failure to properly investigate. When they thought they had their man, no- one else mattered. Once the juggernaut starts to roll, even in cases as far back as Beamish and Button in the '60s, then there's no pressing the button to say, "Stop, hold on. Whoa, boy. We might just be on the wrong track." I don't see any of that in the current, or in the past, police culture in Western Australia. Nor do I see it in the prosecuting authorities."

Police / Prosecution Misconduct

There are occasions where either police or prosecution misconduct are the cause of a person or persons spending large amounts of time in prison for crimes they have not committed.

Police and prosecution culture in Western Australia has been widely criticised throughout Australia after a number of cases revealed that some police and or prosecutors had acted improperly in a number of high profile cases which were eventually overturned ;after it had been found that police and prosecutors had acted improperly in order to sustain a conviction.

Misconduct can assume many forms such as:

Prosecution material non-disclosure: By law the prosecution has to provide the accused with all materials that are relevant to the case. This includes evidence that may help prove the accused innocence.

Material non-disclosure is when the prosecution fails to give the accused evidence which would assist in their defence. This does not allow the jury to consider the evidence which may be favourable to the accused and can mislead juries into believing that an accused is guilty when there is evidence to establish he or she is not.

Police misconduct and overzealous investigations

Over-zealous police conduct is recognised as a major contributing factor leading to miscarriages of justice.

Some examples of what kind of conduct this would include is police officers deliberately distorting a witness’s statement to suit prosecutions hypothesis, coercing a confession from a suspect, and ignoring or destroying evidence that helps to establish the accused is innocent.

It seems that the police and prosecutors that engage in this type of behaviour often appear to engage in such conduct because they strongly believe the suspect is guilty and consequently fail to follow other lines of inquiry. They are not always aware of the accused innocence and in some instances it is not until new evidence comes to light or many years later does the police officer or prosecutor realise the accused person he had falsified evidence against was actually innocent.

T H E I N N O C E N C E P R O J E C T WA

THE FACES OF

EXONERATION

TOM PERCY QC