Crime and Misconduct Commission v Chapman - [2011] QCAT 530

CITATION:

Crime and Misconduct Commission v Chapman and Anor [2011] QCAT 530

PARTIES:	Crime and Misconduct Commission (Applicant/Appellant)
v
Steven Chapman Assistant Commissioner Paul Wilson (Respondents)

APPLICATION NUMBER:

OCR030-11

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 order of Assistant Commissioner Wilson dated 2 February 2011, imposing a sanction on the respondent Sgt Chapman of a fine of $200 on a charge of improper conduct in failing to comply with QPS policy regarding pursuits is set aside;

2. In its place it is ordered that the respondent Sgt Chapman’s level of salary entitlements be reduced by two pay points for a period of two years.

CATCHWORDS:

Police Misconduct – Sanction – Pursuit Policy directions discussed – where respondent failed to follow pursuit policy contained in the Human Resources Management Manual 14.23.5 – where failure to notify local communications centre of the commencement of the pursuit – where failure to abandon pursuit where unacceptable risk to safety – where pursuit resulted in death and serious injury – where sanction imposed inadequate to reflect the seriousness of the conduct

CMC v Barnett and Eaton (No 2) [2011] QCAT 161

APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any):

APPLICANT:	Crime and Misconduct Commission represented by Mr T D Gardiner of counsel instructed by Ms Wood
RESPONDENT:	Stephen Wayne Chapman represented by Mr P Smith of counsel instructed by Queensland Police Union of Employees

REASONS FOR DECISION

Proceedings and issues

On 2 February 2011 Acting Commissioner Wilson found two charges of misconduct to have been substantiated against Senior Constable Chapman, and fined him $200 on each matter.

Those proceedings and the present review arise out of a police pursuit on the Gold Coast on 16 June 2006 in which a motorcyclist died and a pillion passenger was seriously injured.

The charges, shortly stated, are that Chapman failed to comply with QPS pursuit policy and that he was untruthful during disciplinary interviews.

The CMC has sought review of the sanctions on the ground that they are manifestly inadequate.
In the original proceedings Chapman pleaded guilty to a charge of breach of police pursuit policy, and not guilty to a charge of being untruthful during police interviews. The decision-maker found both charges to be substantiated. However Chapman then brought proceedings for review on the untruthfulness charge (Chapman v Wilson and CMC, OCR029-11), and in reasons published today in that matter the substantiation of that charge has been set aside.

Therefore the only live issue for determination in the present proceeding is the adequacy of the sanction imposed for breach of pursuit policy.

The pursuit charges

There are two separate particulars of the pursuit charge against Chapman, one, in respect of failing to notify Comms at the commencement of the pursuit, and the other, in respect of his conduct in Beechmont Road towards the end of the pursuit. The…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Crime and Misconduct Commission v Chapman

Details

AGLC: Crime and Misconduct Commission v Chapman [2011] QCAT 530
Case: [2011] QCAT 530
Decision Date: 20 October 2011

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of Crime and Misconduct Commission versus Chapman, the court was presented with an appeal regarding the adequacy of a sanction imposed on a police officer for breaching pursuit policy. The respondent, Sergeant Chapman, was found to have failed to adhere to the specific policy outlined in the Human Resources Management Manual 14.23.5, which mandates the notification of the local communications centre upon the commencement of a pursuit and requires the abandonment of a pursuit when it presents an unacceptable risk to safety. Chapman’s non-compliance with these directives resulted in a fatal accident causing both death and serious injury. The central legal issue before the court was whether the sanction imposed on Chapman was sufficient to reflect the gravity of his misconduct.

The court examined the nature of Chapman’s failure to follow the pursuit policy and its direct consequences. The judge considered the policy’s importance in ensuring safety and the significant harm caused by Chapman’s actions. The court found that the initial sanction of a $200 fine was inadequate to reflect the seriousness of Chapman’s conduct and the resulting harm. It was determined that the fine did not adequately deter future misconduct or appropriately reflect the weight of the responsibilities violated by Chapman. Consequently, the court set aside the original sanction and imposed a more stringent penalty, reducing Chapman’s salary by two pay points for a period of two years.

In conclusion, the court ruled that the original sanction imposed on Sergeant Chapman was insufficient to address the severity of his breach of pursuit policy and the resultant tragic consequences. The court’s decision underscored the importance of adhering to policy directives in police operations and the need for sanctions to reflect the gravity of misconduct that endangers public safety. The final order of the court mandated a more appropriate penalty, aiming to ensure both accountability and deterrence.

Orders

Orders of the court

2. In its place it is ordered that the respondent Sgt Chapman’s level of salary entitlements be reduced by two pay points for a period of two years.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.