Setting a police dog on a man who fled from police in a vehicle in Greymouth was “not justified or necessary” the police watchdog has ruled.
The Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) said the chase on May 29, 2020, did not warrant a police dog being deployed.
The chase had begun after "Mr X", in his 60s at the time, did not stop after a police officer signalled him to.
The officer had been parked outside a school when a member of the public approached him and said a vehicle was driving “slowly” but was “swerving”.
It was thought Mr X could have been driving after drinking. He told the IPCA he was driving at varying speeds as he was trying to see if there was a pattern to a warning light which had been coming on now and then.
He admitted this may have been unusual but told the IPCA he was worried police might harm him. He said the week of the incident he had been feeling anxious and paranoid.
The pursuit lasted 32 minutes and went for 18-20km. It ended on a gravel road which became “very bumpy” and which had thick gorse lining it. Mr X’s vehicle travelled below the speed limit the whole time — 54km/h in a 100km/h zone at one stage.
A police dog handler, "Officer B", had joined the pursuit halfway through and was responsible for arresting Mr X. The other officer, "Officer A", had pulled back because he could not keep up with them without damaging the patrol car.
Their vehicles were going about 10km/h by this time.
Officer B told the IPCA he thought Mr X was going to run off into the bush and this was why he released the police dog. Mr X said he was standing by his open door waiting to be arrested.
The IPCA said it not accept Mr X would have got lost in the bush.
The police dog bit Mr X on his leg during his arrest and he required stitches in hospital, the IPCA noted.
He complained to the IPCA the use of the dog was excessive and unnecessary.
“[Officer B] had no reason to think Mr X was a risk to himself or anyone else, meaning there were other options available to him before releasing his dog, including a more concerted attempt to communicate with Mr X,” IPCA chairman Judge Colin Doherty concluded.
“In this case, the seriousness of the offending and suspected offending, and the risk posed by Mr X if not immediately apprehended, was not sufficient to justify the degree of force used.”
Inspector Jacqui Corner, West Coast Area Commander, said police acknowledged the IPCA’s findings.
“These are fast-moving and dynamic situations that require situational awareness and an ongoing risk assessment by the officers involved,” she said.
“We believe our officer acted appropriately given their risk assessment of the situation.
“However, we acknowledge the authority’s findings and have provided further training on the tactical options our staff have available in relation to the risk posed by offenders and the appropriate use of force.”
SHARE ME