Sacking of lonely young Victorian country cop who had sex with woman he was investigating was ‘unreasonable’, court finds
A judge has ruled it was unfair to fire a “lone” police officer after he had sex with a woman he was investigating for sexual assault.
The police chief, who cannot be named, was fired after admitting in February 2022 that he had made a “mistake”.
“I knew there was no other way out, that I had to go there immediately and tell them what had happened,” he said.
The officer was fired by Victoria Police in June last year, approximately 18 months after he reported the incident himself to a senior officer the following morning.
He was cleared of any wrongdoing after appealing the decision to the Police Registration and Services Board, but the case ended up in the state Supreme Court this year after the police commissioner challenged the ruling.
The court was told that on February 14, 2022, the officer was off-duty and drinking with a colleague at Rafferty’s Tavern in Warrnambool when he was approached by the woman he was investigating in relation to an alleged assault.
The couple began socializing and had sex that same evening after the woman offered to drive him home.
The Council commended the officer for his “moral courage” in reporting what had happened and found there was no evidence of a breach of disciplinary action.
The senior officer, who cannot be named, was fired after coming forward in February 2022 to admit he had “made a blunder”
In delivering his verdict on Thursday, Judge Michael McDonald ruled that the officer had indeed breached the conflict of interest policy. But he agreed that the original decision to dismiss the man was “harsh, unjust or unreasonable” and sent it back to the Police Registration and Services Board to decide on a new sentence.
We do not introduce his brief liaison with him. [the woman] was a great idea or something good for his career. It was not,’ the Council wrote.
“But it was a very human decision, made by a young man in a new city, after a breakup, on a night out after a lot of drinking, who was lonely, who responded to attention, who may not have been thinking straight.”
The chief constable’s lawyer, Elizabeth Bennett SC, argued that the council’s decision effectively condoned the officer’s actions, calling them “illogical”.
In his ruling on Thursday, Judge Michael McDonald found that the officer had indeed violated the conflict of interest policy.
However, he admitted the original decision to dismiss the man was “harsh, unjust or unreasonable” and referred it back to the Police Registration and Services Council to decide on a new sentence.
There is a benefit in transferring [the officer’s] “A request for review of the dismissal decision must be submitted to a differently composed board for a new hearing,” he said.
‘The Council has a wide discretion as to the extent to which relief should be granted. The Council will have to reconsider whether this discretion is exercised.’