Police have been found not to have assaulted a young teenager following a police chase in Palmerston North, but the pursuit should have been abandoned early on, the Independent Police Conduct Authority has ruled.
It comes after a police officer signalled the driver of a Subaru - given the pseudonym Mr X in the report - to stop near the Palmerston North town centre to check his driver's licence and conduct a breath alcohol test on April 22, 2018, the police watchdog said in a statement.
The driver instead accelerated away, and the officer started a pursuit, the report states. During this incident, the officer could see several occupants in the vehicle, but was unaware that they and the driver were young teenagers.
The driver of the Subaru, which was by then identified as stolen, then drove on the wrong side of the road with the headlights off, forcing an oncoming vehicle to take evasive action to avoid a collision, according to the IPCA. The Subaru then drove over road spikes laid by police, causing it to slow down. The officer then used his patrol car to push the car into a wall.
The young man immediately got out of the car and charged at the officer armed with a screwdriver, after which the officer used pepper spray and manual force to arrest him, authorities said. Mr X received injuries to his back and face during the arrest.
The teen later told his social worker that he immediately surrendered to police but was kicked and punched by officers. The social worker raised their concerns with police, who notified the IPCA.
The IPCA found that the injuries to the teen's face were caused by reasonable force used by officers to arrest him. While the cause of his back injuries were unknown, the authority was satisfied that he was not kicked or punched by officers during his arrest.
However, the authority found that that there had been several instances during the pursuit where the teen's driving created unjustifiable risks and the chase should have been abandoned, they said. Some of the officers involved attempted to use tactics to stop the vehicle which they had not been trained in, creating risks which were not justified by the circumstances, they said.
"When an officer decides to commence a pursuit, he or she also commits to conducting an ongoing, robust assessment of the risks created by fleeing driver and the overall pursuit scenario," authority chair Judge Colin Doherty said.
"There were clear early signs that this driver was prepared to put himself and others at risk in order to avoid police.
"Weighing all factors, it was safer for police [to] disengage. Certainly, the pursuit should not have reached the point where officers were contemplating stopping the Subaru using a blocking manoeuvre or force."
Police have since acknowledged the IPCA's findings, and accepted they "could have done things differently".
"Police officers have to balance the risks involved in pursuing a fleeing driver with the need to protect the public from potentially dangerous behaviour and further offending," central district commander superintendent Chris de Wattignar said in a statement.
"In this instance, I fully support the intent of the officer in our endeavours to stop this driver, but accept that we could have done things differently.
"I am pleased the IPCA agreed that no assault occurred during the arrest."
Police and the IPCA have since developed an action plan to "improve cognitive training and support for fleeing driver events", Mr de Wattignar said.
More Stories
SHARE ME