The Authority oversaw two separate Police investigations into one officer’s use of the 40mm less-lethal sponge rounds to effect the arrest of two persons.
In the first case the officer fired the 40mm sponge round while an unarmed man was up a tree trying to hide. The man had run away from Police after a family harm incident. The man threatened to assault officers, ignored officers’ instructions and wouldn’t show them his hands.
After the man was shot, he got down from the tree and ran away. A Police dog was used to prevent him from escaping. The man attacked the Police dog and the same officer fired a 40mm sponge round which resulted in the man’s arrest.
Police found that firing the sponge round while the man was hiding up the tree was not reasonable and proportionate, and a breach of the Police Code of Conduct. We agreed with this decision.
The second incident occurred the following day. It involved Police pursuing a man after he stole a car and burgled a dairy while armed with a screwdriver. The man drove the wrong way down the motorway at high speed and in heavy traffic and swerved towards a Police car. The car was stopped by Police on the motorway.
The man got out of the car, stood in behind the open door and put his hands up. He had an object in his hand, identified after the incident as a vape device. The same officer fired the sponge round through window of the car door and into the man’s body. The man was then arrested.
Police found the officer acted lawfully, reasonably and proportionately in this situation based on the circumstances as he believed them to be. These circumstances included the unidentified object in the man’s hand, which the officer said could have been a screwdriver.
We found that the force used was disproportionate and therefore unjustified having regard to the nature of the perceived threat, which was not imminent. The officer could have delayed firing the sponge round in these circumstances.
IPCA: 24-24627 & 24-24664