Inquest into the death of Raymond Noel
COR 2017/3012, Findings, Coroner Olle
Facts
Raymond Noel, a Gunnai, Gunditjmara and Wiradjuri man, died in a car accident following a police pursuit on 25 June 2017.
At around 10.50pm, Raymond Noel left his home to purchase chocolate at a local supermarket in Melbourne’s north. He drove an unregistered Commodore owned by his partner’s father.
Despite there being nothing untoward about the way the Commodore was being driven, and the requirement that "a serious risk of public health and safety" must exist before trying to intercept a driver, two police officers in a marked police vehicle decided the Commodore looked “dodgy” and worth intercepting.
The Coroners Court heard that the police completed a U-turn and upon receiving information that the Commodore was unregistered, the police reached a speed of 134km per hour in a 50km zone as they tried to catch up to Raymond Noel, who was unaware he was being followed.
When the emergency lights and sirens were turned on, Raymond Noel sped up.
During the pursuit, both cars reached speeds above 150km per hour. After 21 seconds, the Commodore veered onto the wrong side of the road and crashed.
On 20 September 2021, the Coroner delivered his findings, which criticised the Victoria Police policy and rules regarding police pursuits (Pursuit Policy) and its application.
The Pursuit Policy includes the mandatory requirements and justification criteria that must be met before police in an approved police vehicle can pursue members of the public, and also provides guidance on the decision making and risk assessments that are to be continually assessed throughout a pursuit.
Key findings
The pursuit was not justified
The Coroner made a clear finding that Raymond Noel had done nothing wrong when he first attracted police attention, and that the pursuit was not justified. This was because, at the point in time when the decision was made to intercept Raymond Noel, the police were unaware that the Commodore was unregistered.
The Coroner found that the Pursuit Policy justification criteria clearly states that police are required to turn their minds to whether they reasonably believe a serious risk to public health or safety exists before attempting interception, and that this should be interpreted as requiring the risk to exist before police involvement with the driver.
The Chief Commissioner of Police’s counsel disputed this interpretation, submitting that the risk justifying a pursuit must only occur directly prior to the pursuit being called, not before police involvement. The Coroner did not accept this submission.
The Coroner criticised the lack of concern from both the police officers and the then Assistant Commissioner of Police, who gave a written statement, about police vehicles bearing down upon a vehicle at significant speed without lights or siren activated. The Coroner stated that the police did not considered that their attempt to intercept had escalated into a scenario of extreme danger.
Use of urgent duty driving
‘Urgent duty driving’ occurs when a police member drives a police vehicle in a manner that requires breach of one or more of the Road Safety Road Rules 2009 in order to respond to an incident or carry out duties.
During the inquest, the Coroner heard evidence regarding the prevalence of police conducting urgent duty driving at high speeds without emergency lights operating in order to attempt an intercept for minor traffic matters.
The Coroner found that there was "no justification" for the police to exceed the speed limit to catch up to Raymond Noel without their lights and sirens activated.
The Coroners Court heard that neither police officer involved knew the speed of the vehicle at any stage of their involvement with the Commodore. The driver of the police vehicle chose not to activate emergency lights or siren, explaining he did not want to alert the driver to pull over, until sufficiently close, in case the Commodore attempted to avoid interception.
The Coroner recommended that urgent duty driving should not be undertaken by a police vehicle travelling at a high speed without emergency lights, stating that: “[t]his poses an unacceptably high risk to other road users and there is a real potential to instil fear in the subject diver, which can cause the driver to make poor decisions in panic.”
The Coroner noted that this form of urgent duty driving should only occur in very limited circumstances, such as in response to a siege, potential shooting or abduction.
In order to ensure that police in police vehicles are always aware of the speed of their vehicle, the Coroner highlighted the importance of all police vehicles being fitted with a fully calibrated LED display that shows the accurate speed the police vehicle is travelling and that the display be positioned in a location that can be viewed by the passenger. This is to ensure that the passenger can advise the driver and the pursuit controller (who coordinates the pursuit via radio transmission) accurate speeds at regular intervals during a pursuit.
Treatment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people by police
The Coroner found that neither police officer could identify the driver when the decision to intercept the Commodore was made, and that the pursuit was not “racially motivated”.
Though there was no evidentiary basis that the decision-making was influenced by Raymond Noel’s Aboriginality, the Coroner commented that Raymond Noel’s adverse interactions with police during his life were likely to inform his response to the police intervention.
The Coroner acknowledged the long and complex history of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities across Australia with police, including their overrepresentation in all forms of custody and experiences of high levels of police contact.
The Coroner made it clear that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are disproportionately represented in pursuit related fatalities, noting that they accounted for 17% off all fatal pursuit-related vehicle crashes in Australia between 2000 and 2011.
The Coroner recommended that Victoria Police’s pursuit training address the complex relationship between police and Aboriginal communities stating that: “[i]t would be beneficial for Victoria Police’s pursuit training to canvas the disproportionate representation of Aboriginal people in pursuit-related deaths, and to alert police members to the possibility that the complex relationship between Aboriginal communities and police may inform Aboriginal responses to and perceptions of police intervention.”
Change to Pursuit Policy
The Pursuit Policy at the time of Raymond Noel’s death was created in 2016 following negative feedback from Victoria Police and the public on the predecessor policy which was broadly viewed as a ‘no pursuit’ policy. While the previous policy reduced the number of pursuits and, in turn, pursuit-related fatalities, Victoria Police backflipped on the policy to increase their powers to pursue members of the public in a broader range of circumstances.
The most significant change in the 2016 Pursuit Policy was the removal of the prohibition to pursuing drivers for any property or minor traffic offences. The Coroner stated that the removal of this prohibition, coupled with the requirement that a serious risk must exist before the decision to intercept, dilutes the primacy of life foundation of the Pursuit Policy and dangerously “invites differing decisions made in a highly charge and rapidly evolving setting.”
The Coroner recommended that there be some prescription within the Pursuit Policy, that is used to prompt the thought processes of police, so that there is no scope for interpretation of the requirement for a serious risk to health or safety of a person to exist before a decision to intercept is made.
Victoria Police pursuits training
The Coroner stated that police should be given continuing training on the Pursuit Policy and that this training involve elements of practical training behind the wheel, and, if possible, the use of simulators. The Coroner also recommended that Victoria Police should install in-car video systems into police vehicles so that video footage from actual pursuits can be used in simulators and as part of practical training.
Recommendations
The Coroner recommended that:
The Victoria Police Pursuit Policy mandate that the following requirement be satisfied before commencing a pursuit: “a serious risk to health or safety of a person must exist before the decision to intercept, that is before police involvement”.
The Pursuit Policy training implemented by Victoria Police must ensure there is no scope for interpretation of the above requirement and that the policy means what it says.
The Pursuit Policy must mandate that neither urgent duty driving nor pursuit be conducted unless the police are always aware of their speeds.
In every pursuit, irrespective of the outcome, the Pursuit Policy must require members to record for review, the serious risk which existed before the decision to intercept, that is before police involvement.
The full findings are available here.