CCTV image from inside the Hawera Police Station on 31 May 2019 after Allen Ball was placed in cell one. Photo / NZ Police
CCTV image from inside the Hawera Police Station on 31 May 2019 after Allen Ball was placed in cell one. Photo / NZ Police
New Zealand Police provides inadequate training for its recruits and staff before they are sent out on the job, a defence lawyer in the manslaughter trial of three Taranaki officers at the High Court in New Plymouth says.
The three Hawera officers all have name suppression after being charged with the manslaughter of 55-year-old Allen Ball on June 1, 2019, after he died in one of their cells.
Kylie Pascoe, defence lawyer for Officer B, delivered her closing statement to another packed public gallery of friends and family of both the accused and Ball's family - some of whom have flown over from Australia.
Pascoe said Officer B was not grossly negligent that night, "his omission to obtain medical care in this circumstance was not so bad as to justify criminal sanction".
"The failure to obtain medical assistance of Mr Ball was the result of systemic failures, not the gross negligence of [Officer B].
"The systemic failure of New Zealand Police to implement adequate recruit training that protected its staff from the circumstances the night Mr Ball died."
As for first aid training, Pascoe accepted her client had been trained however the jury was being asked to accept her client knew the risks around snoring.
"Snoring is important because it's Mr Ball's snoring that appears to inform [Officer A's] decision-making regarding the status of Mr Ball."
Allen Ball died in a cell at Hawera Police Station during the early hours of June 1, 2019. Photo / Supplied
Officer B took the fact that Ball was snoring meant that "he's fine, he's breathing" and that was evident throughout his DVD interview with detectives less than a week after his death, after noting he didn't respond to pain compliance techniques in the car.
That interview proved that her client simply thought Ball was a "sleeping drunk" and not, as the Crown had submitted, that Ball was unresponsive.
"He was looking to see if he had vomited, other than that he was looking for confirmation that Mr Ball was breathing; chest moving, all the way being positively reassured by Mr Ball's snoring."
Pascoe said her client admitted he made a mistake that night but he was no criminal.
"These circumstances cannot make you sure that [Officer A] was indifferent to any obvious risk; that he had actual foresight of the risk but nevertheless decided to run with it.
"Yes, he made a mistake, [Ball] was not snoring and sleeping off his intoxication … but that does not make him grossly negligent."
Defence lawyer for Officer B, Kylie Pascoe. Photo / Pool
Pascoe said while her client had completed custody management training, it was only a four hour course – minus afternoon tea – and was training that he wasn't assessed on.
"There's no test or assessment … to see whether this training is hitting the mark."
In the two months leading up to Ball's death, her client had only entered 10 arrests into the NIA system.
Pascoe said her client was going to use the processing and arrest of Ball to go towards an assessment and asked the jury why he would want to sacrifice that and suddenly become a "risk taker".
"It is utterly ridiculous that [Officer B] was aware Mr Ball was unresponsive but was determined to run the risk."
As for the alerts which popped up on Officer A's screen as he processed Ball, Pascoe said it was the first time he had come across them so it wasn't surprising that he couldn't recall them when questioned by police in his DVD interview.
Allen Ball is carried into Hawera Police Station by six police officers on May 31, 2019. Photo / NZ Police
"All of the evidence is consistent with the fact that he thought Mr Ball was drunk and snoring."
Pascoe also highlighted the comments made by officers after putting him in the cell; including a hand gesture by Officer A, Officer B saying '10/0 cuz no good' and Officer C's that Ball was "f****** wasted before he got here", were not said out of callousness, rather they were indicative of their belief they were dealing with a very drunk man.
Judge Susan Thomas will sum up the case for the jury of four men and seven woman after a short break before sending the jury out to begin deliberations.
