Queensland police refused to discipline officer accused of domestic violence against pregnant partner | Queensland

A Queensland police force has refused to take disciplinary action against a police officer accused of multiple counts of serious domestic violence against his pregnant wife and “interfering with the course of justice” to undermine the terms of a protection order.

The circumstances of the case, revealed in a Queensland court ruling this month, have sparked a legal challenge from the state’s Crime and Corruption Commission.

The court found the QPS were at fault and ordered them to launch a belated disciplinary hearing against the officer, who was docked full pay in 2022 as a result of the allegations.

The officer, who also faces criminal charges, left the QPS in 2023 after being declared medically unfit.

_{Sign up: AÜ Breaking News email}

Police decided last year that taking disciplinary action against the officer, who also faces four charges related to an alleged domestic violence offence, “provided no tangible benefit” and decided not to investigate.

The Queensland Public Service Administration Act contains discretionary powers to allow police officers to be subject to internal disciplinary proceedings after leaving the QPS.

In practice, these powers are rarely used. The 2022 inquiry into police responses to domestic and family violence found cases where internal disciplinary processes for allegations of serious misconduct were not concluded because officers resigned or retired.

The court found that the QPS “failed to give sufficient weight and importance” to the officer’s conduct, which occurred “over a prolonged period”.

The allegations included “numerous acts of physical violence against the former police officer’s heavily pregnant ex-partner, who posed a serious risk not only to herself but also to her unborn child.”

It also included “repeated violations of the law and persistent disobedience of lawful authority” and threats to kill and harm.

The court ruled that the former officer allegedly “interfered with the course of justice” [premeditated] and involved significant pressure.”

“This behavior ultimately led to the relaxation of the conditions under the Temporary Protection Order and [placing] The decision stated that the victims were at risk.

The CCC argued that the decision-maker, Acting Detective Supt Christopher Hansel, had failed to properly consider the seriousness of the grounds for disciplinary action, and the court agreed.

In his first decision, Hansel decided that “in a situation where these issues continue throughout the court process, there would be no concrete benefit in investigating these issues.”

This conclusion was “misunderstood and unsupported by the evidence,” the court said before Hansel ruled.

“Whatever the outcome of the court process, the benefit to the QPS will be that the former officer’s conduct will be appropriately assessed internally within the QPS and that a disciplinary statement will be made if disciplinary action is taken,” the tribunal said.

“[Hansel’s] “The decision means that the former officer escapes from this process.”

The CCC also argued that the disciplinary hearing “will have the wider benefit of QPS maintaining public confidence in its ability to deal with serious disciplinary allegations of this nature”.

Last month the QPS announced it would abolish its specialist command on domestic and family violence. In doing so, senior officials argued, the service was addressing cultural deficiencies highlighted in the 2022 investigation.