Contaminated BBQ

Sittings of the Coronial Inquest into the killing of Kwementyaye Walker today heard explosive allegations of a “wholly inappropriate”  social gathering in the  days following the shooting death.

The BBQ,  held in contravention of police general orders,  “had the potential  to contaminate” Zach Rolfe’s evidence at his murder trial, a court has  heard.

Earlier this year, constable Rolfe was acquitted on all charges by a Supreme Court jury in March.

Today, the court heard a police general order was in place at the time, requiring that witnesses, “particularly any police members”, be prevented from communicating after a death in custody.

But just two days after the killing, and before Constable Rolfe had made a formal statement, counsel assisting Dr Dwyer said the accused hosted several police officers, including his three fellow Immediate Response Team members, for a barbecue at his home.

This issue was put to Assistant Commissioner Travis Wurst  - the most senior officer to take the stand at the inquest so far.

Counsel assisting asked:

“It’s clearly understood that preservation of life and first aid had to be the top priority (in Yuendumu), after Kumanjayi had passed away, do you agree that every effort should have been made to separate the involved police officers?”

Mr Wurst agreed that the purpose of that was “to make sure they don’t contaminate each other’s account”.

Dr Dwyer continued:

“And that can happen, either inadvertently, because it confuses your  own memory by talking to another witnesses, or there can be deliberate  interference where police officers might get together and talk about how  they’re going to present their evidence,”

“And  whether they do that or don’t, the public needs to maintain confidence,  don’t they, that police officers will be separated and there won’t be  contamination of their evidence.

“And  in this case, where you’ve got a situation where there was going to be  an investigation to determine whether there was a homicide, an unlawful  killing, it was absolutely essential that Constable Rolfe be separated  from other IRT members who he was with at the time of the shooting?”

Mr Wurst again agreed, acknowledging it was “wholly inappropriate” for such a gathering to take place in  circumstances where only some members of the IRT -  notably, not including  Constable Rolfe - had provided statements to investigators.

Mr  Wurst further  said it was also a contravention of general orders,  “particularly in relation to Constable Rolfe”, and had “the potential to  contaminate the version of events that Constable Rolfe eventually gave  in his trial”.

Mr  Wurst said that it was “a fair assumption to make” that the gathering contaminated Constable Rolfe's evidence.

asked:

“Do you  know whether or not any of the officers who were involved in attending  that social gathering have been disciplined or spoken to about the fact  that they were there?”

Mr Wurst replied: “No, I’ve only become aware of that this morning, so I’m not aware of any outcomes in relation to that.”