Chapman v Assistant Commissioner Wilson and Anor

CITATION: Chapman v Assistant Commissioner Wilson and Anor [2011] QCAT 529

PARTIES:	Stephen Wayne Chapman (Applicant)
v
Assistant Commissioner Paul Wilson Crime and Misconduct Commission (Respondents)

APPLICATION NUMBER:   OCR029-11

MATTER TYPE: Occupational regulation matters

HEARING DATE: 5 September 2011

HEARD AT: Brisbane

DECISION OF: Hon James Thomas AM QC, Presiding Member
Richard Oliver, Senior Member.

DELIVERED ON: 20 October 2011

DELIVERED AT: Brisbane

ORDERS MADE:     

[1]     The first respondent’s determination that matter one (untruthfulness) was substantiated against the applicant Stephen Wayne Chapman, and that it amounted to misconduct, is set aside;

[2]     It is determined that matter one is not substantiated;

[3]     The fine of $200 on matter one is set aside;

[4]     The first respondent’s determination that matter two (improper conduct in failing to comply with QPS policy regarding pursuits) was substantiated against the applicant Stephen Wayne Chapman, and that it amounted to misconduct, is confirmed.

CATCHWORDS: 

Police Discipline – distinction between “pursuit” and “urgent driving” discussed – admissibility of evidence in coronial inquiry where applicant claimed privilege considered – review of the respondents findings that the applicant was untruthful – meaning of “untruthfulness” in the context of formal interviews – where failure to disclose mobile phone calls in a formal interview – where failure to volunteer information about mobile phone calls must be considered in the context of the questioning in the interview and the circumstances generally – where no motive for untruthfulness established

Coroners Act 2003, ss 39(3), 51(2)

CMC v Barnett & Eaton [2011] QCAT 161

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

APPLICANT:

Stephen Wayne Chapman represented by Mr P Smith of counsel instructed by Queensland Police Union of Employees

RESPONDENT:

Assistant Commissioner Paul Wilson represented by Mr S McLeod of counsel instructed by Ms Heffner, the Police Service Solicitor

Crime and Misconduct Commission represented by Mr T D Gardiner of counsel instructed by Ms Wood

REASONS FOR DECISION

Proceedings

1. This review is one of five that have been brought challenging findings by Assistant Commissioner Wilson in disciplinary proceedings against four police officers arising out of an incident in 2006.

1. On 16 June 2006, in the course of a police pursuit in the Gold Coast area, a motorcyclist died and his pillion passenger was seriously injured.  Disciplinary proceedings were commenced against the four policemen who were involved in the incident.  They were discontinued while a coronial inquiry was conducted.

1. Disciplinary proceedings were then recommenced, and on 2 February 2011 Deputy Commissioner Wilson delivered his findings in respect of the conduct of all four policemen.

1. The present applicant, Senior Constable Chapman, was found guilty of two charges of misconduct and fined $200 on each. 

2. The charges against the other three police officers, Senior Constable Buckley, Constable Webley and Sergeant McLoughlin were all found to be unsubstantiated.

1. In this proceeding in QCAT, Chapman seeks review of the finding that the first charge against him (untruthfulness) was substantiated.  Obviously no review is sought of the second charge to which he pleaded guilty.

1. The Crime and Misconduct Commission, in its watchdog…