Queensland Police Service has been ordered to pay costs in a matter where officers failed to properly consider potential domestic violence when attending to a woman after a car accident.
In Gympie Magistrates Court on Tuesday, Angela Gay Gauld was awarded the $1850 costs of having to defend two driving charges – which were dismissed after police offered no evidence – related to an incident in the Gympie Region last year.
Magistrate Hughes said a soaked Ms Gauld was already distraught when she was questioned by police on a boat in Tin Can Bay wharf on the night of 15 July, having been in a car accident.
The two male officers did not provide her with a blanket as requested, nor did they address her concerns about her torn clothing, when they escorted her from the vessel.
Ms Gauld was then ordered into a police car without being charged or under arrest, being told she would “did not have any choice” when she resisted.
“Ms Gauld told the officers she was cold and wanted a blanket and her phone. The officers assured her they would get these for her. They never did,” Magistrate Hughes said.
An officer returned to the boat and questioned Ms Gauld’s partner, who told them Ms Gauld had jumped into the water to get on his boat.
“The officers then had a conversation in the front of the police car. They noted that Ms Gauld claimed her partner had been doing “things to her”. One of the officers then said to “put her on the bag and we’ll take it from there”. They also decided to question Ms Gauld about the phone to “find out what’s on it”.”
At the station, a barefoot, cold and crying Ms Gauld again requested her phone – to prevent her partner from deleting possible evidence – while also telling police she was scared.
She also informed police she did not jump into the water, but was wet because her partner had pushed away the boat access ladder when she was trying to climb aboard.
Magistrate Hughes said the law identified a woman as particularly vulnerable to domestic violence.
“When police arrived at the scene, Ms Gauld was cold, wet and highly distressed. She was on her partner’s boat pleading for support. Her pants were torn. She had fallen into the water. She gave an explanation that could have been referable to being a victim of – or attempting to escape from – domestic violence,” he said.
“Ms Gauld continued to request her phone, suggesting to police it contained relevant evidence. Yet police dismissed her request based on an outdated and debunked assessment from their perception of her emotional state when compared with her male partner: “I understand if we need the phone we can go get it. But at the moment, he’s calm; she’s not.”
Magistrate Hughes said the dismissive attitude toward Ms Gauld’s request for her phone and her suggestions of domestic violence continued at the station.
“Her concerns were neither acknowledged nor addressed. She had been in an accident. Apart from being given a towel, her requests for a blanket and her phone were ignored. She was then berated, before being arrested and charged,” he said.
“Police failed to properly consider indicia of domestic violence towards Ms Gauld when at the scene, when taking her to the police station and when questioning her at the police station.
“Ms Gauld specifically asked police to get her phone to “see the evidence”. She exhorted them to. Yet they did not. That was a failure to take steps to investigate matters coming to, or within, the knowledge of a person responsible for bringing or continuing the proceeding. The investigation was flawed from the start.
“By not properly regarding Ms Gauld’s legitimate interests as a potential victim of domestic violence, the investigation failed to ‘meet the moment’.”
Magistrate Hughes said the court brief prepared by police referred to Ms Gauld “heavily slurring her words”, “quite unsteady on her feet”, and “swaying left to right”, yet police bodycam footage did not show any of these characteristics.
He said when police attended to Ms Gauld about 30 minutes after the accident, she was on the boat, sitting and speaking coherently.
He said bodycam footage showed post-driving alcohol consumption, creating doubt about when Ms Gauld was under the influence, if at all.
“Given the investigative deficiencies and their detrimental impact on Ms Gauld, I do not consider the investigation was conducted in an appropriate way,” he said.
“The defence’s early notice to the prosecution of the investigative deficiencies is a relevant factor favouring an award of costs. The suspension of Ms Gauld’s licence in a regional community would have caused her real prejudice,” he said, pointing out her licence had been suspended for six months.
Magistrate Hughes said persisting with an inherently deficient proceeding unnecessarily exposed Ms Gauld to expense, delay and inconvenience until police offered no evidence.
He said none of her conduct was sufficient to disentitle her to costs.
“Ms Gauld was a frightened woman who may have been a victim of domestic violence,” he said.
“Viewed objectively, the arbitrary discounting of Ms Gauld’s side of the story and indicia of domestic violence from the start, the dismissive and at times peremptory treatment she endured at the police station, the failure by police to follow proper process, the early notice by the defence of the investigative deficiencies and the manifest injustice Ms Gauld suffered from the loss of her licence elevate her case above the ordinary criminal case.”
He said her costs fixed on a scale basis would be a maximum of $1750.
“Public policy considerations of investigative fairness towards vulnerable women in a domestic violence setting elevate Ms Gauld’s case above an ordinary criminal case. Ms Gauld is awarded her just and reasonable costs of $1840,” he said.
Share this article