According to the Crown summary of facts supplied to NZME, Watson responded with: “What’s the address, I’ll have a look?” She then logged into the police’s National Intelligence Application (NIA) and searched the address her friend had supplied.
The NIA is a secure police record system used to store information about millions of New Zealanders. It includes flags for firearms licence holders, people known by police to be HIV (Aids) positive, and alerts for paedophiles and convicted murderers.
Access requires a security clearance and its use is audited to ensure employees aren’t misusing it. When new employees are given access, they are warned they can only use it for work purposes and must have a reason for everything they search within the system.
Alerts within the system can be placed on addresses and occupants of that same address can be linked to it.
Watson clicked on four people associated with the address and then took photos on her phone of their files, which included the last three months of police callouts at the address.
“There is aaaalloooot [sic] against their address,” Watson said in a follow-up message to her friend. “Family violence, disorder, drug searches … the list goes on.”
She then sent the photographs she’d taken of the NIA files to her friend via Facebook messenger. Shortly after, the friend posted the images to a Facebook chat group containing 10 other people within the Massey area.
At least five of them had viewed it before police became aware. The photos were later removed from the group.
Watson’s lawyer, Todd Simmonds, told the court that he was seeking a discharge without conviction for his client and that the consequences for her employment with the police would be significant-enough as a punishment.
“Those consequences would be out of proportion to the overall gravity of what she foolishly did on the morning in question,” he told the court.
Simmonds said that it was likely Watson would be dismissed from the police if she was convicted and rejected the Crown’s submission that the offending had been premeditated.
Crown lawyer Rob MacDonald said that a key part of the offending was the harm Watson had caused to the community and the public’s trust and confidence in police and their ability to keep confidential information a secret.
He argued that there was an element of premeditation in her offending because it was several hours after her friend texted her that she logged onto NIA.
“It gave her several hours to contemplate her actions, it wasn’t knee-jerk offending reacting to events happening at that time,” he told the court this afternoon.
“This isn’t a street fight that happened in the heat of the moment.”
MacDonald said consequences for Watson were already under way and police would be awaiting the outcome of today’s hearing to see whether she had been convicted.
“This goes to the heart of the defendant’s role at the police and the access that sworn and non-sworn officers have to private information. It’s something the police audit themselves every year as they appreciate the consequences of unauthorised access,” MacDonald said.
Ultimately in the Manukau District Court this afternoon Judge Penelope Ginnen declined to grant Watson a discharge without conviction, but she didn’t agree with the Crown’s view that her offending had been premeditated.
“It is my view there was not a great deal of premeditation, it was a spontaneous decision and you acted on it with too little thought,” she said.
“Your position in the NZ Police requires a degree of trust to not misuse your position…you’ve breached that trust. You’ve worked for the police for a long time. You know that while things are monitored and audited the very nature of the work means it needs to be a high trust environment.”
Judge Ginnen said it was lucky that the information wasn’t shared further than the chat group.
“In this digital age it just takes a few clicks of a button for information to be distributed around the world.”
Judge Ginnen said Watson’s actions had damaged the police’s integrity, their trust within the community as well as the privacy of the individuals whose photos and files she shared.
“It was an appalling lapse of judgment on your part. But I do take into account that you didn’t do this for personal gain and you didn’t know your friend would share the information with the chat group,” she said.
“But it was a serious thing you did.”
In sentencing Watson to 80 hours community work Judge Ginnen said she took into account Watson’s early guilty plea, complete lack of criminal history and her otherwise exemplary record during eight years working for the police.
However, the aggravating factors around the breach of privacy and the privileged position Watson was in for having access to the information in NIA meant that she could not escape a conviction.
Watson was placed on restrictive duties after the discovery of the information breach and returned to work within a month.
The police told NZME in an emailed statement that they could not comment on Watson’s case as it was still an active employment investigation.
Since the NIA was introduced in 2001, there have been several instances of police misusing the system, including one sworn police officer who gave information to gangs. Another used it to access information about his Tinder matches.
According to data released to NZME under the Official Information Act, four breaches of the NIA have resulted in criminal charges in the past five years - two of which were uniformed staff and the others were civilians, with Watson being one of those people.
There are still 20 ongoing investigations into misuses of the NIA, with 13 of those involving sworn constabulary members.
