A South Canterbury police officer who reported an assault by another officer was a hero and a judge has expressed concern that he may be penalised.
“He should be praised,” said Christchurch District Court Judge Raoul Neave who heard the assault case. “His conduct could not be more commendable. If he has suffered as a result of it, the police should take a very hard look at themselves. He’s the hero of this situation.”
The police had wanted the officer’s name suppressed in case of any reaction by other police staff and the local community, but Judge Neave refused. The constable had behaved “with the utmost probity” within the standards expected by the police.
The hearing in Christchurch lifted name suppression on the South Canterbury policeman convicted of assaulting a youth who had spat at him.
The judge decided that the officer who carried out the assault, Marcus John Dominey, 38, would be granted at discharge without conviction. He had had interim name suppression, but there was no application to continue the order today and it lapsed.
Judge Neave had found the charge proved at a defended hearing in the Ashburton District Court, after hearing evidence that the officer repeatedly punched a youth, leaving him with black eyes and a lump on his head.
The youth had spat at him while they were in the car together in June 2014, according to another officer who gave evidence at the trial.
Dominey said he punched the youth because he feared he could get an infectious disease if spittle struck his eyeball. However, the judge noted the other officer – who had been driving the patrol car – had given evidence that the punching continued while the youth’s head was between his knees.
There was ample ability to control the complainant without any further force and the subsequent punches were unreasonable. It was likely that at his point the officer had simply become angry.
Defence counsel Pip Hall QC argued today that there should be a discharge because of the likelihood that Dominey would lose his job as a police officer. This had happened in all other cases they had researched about officers convicted of assault on duty.
There was also concern about the effects on his ability to travel to the United States and Canada.
Judge Neave said the police disciplinary inquiry would go ahead whether or not there was a conviction. He accepted there would be an elevated risk of Dominey losing his job.
He noted Dominey had served his country and his community as a soldier and a policeman. As a police officer he was in a privileged position but he was expected to behave with sensitivity and restraint.
When the situation developed, the youth’s actions had been unpleasant, aggressive and risky and were intended to be provocative. He had taunted Dominey by speaking of various diseases, as he spat.
“This very quickly became an exercise in displays of testosterone,” said the judge. The officer’s response had been gratuitously violent.
He noted that if a spit-resistant mask had been available at the time, Dominey would have been able to adopt different procedures.
He decided a discharge without conviction could be granted, but ordered Dominey to pay court costs of $130 and make a $500 donation to the local women’s refuge.
The judge then repeated his comments that the officer who reported the assault should not be adversely affected because of it. He said: “If there are elements in the police force and the local community who think otherwise, they should have a long hard look at themselves, because they are a disgrace.”
The post Suppression lifts on police assault case appeared first on Courtnews.co.nz.