SHOOT TO KILL

Much has been detailed by the voracious media about the Policer shooting death in the Northern Territory. Constable Zachary Rolfe, 30, allegedly shot dead Kumanjayi Walker in November 2019 while trying to arrest him in Yuendumu, about 300km north-west of Alice Springs in the Northern Territory.

After a series of delays, Rolfe’s trial started in Darwin this week.

I have not seen or viewed the bodycam footage, but 34 years of policing enables me to make a balanced comment on the matter.

So, lets look at the facts in the public domain:

Rolfe and another officer, Constable Adam Eberl, had attended a property known as House 511 to arrest Walker at about 7.20pm on 9 November 2019. Walker was subject to an outstanding arrest warrant issued by the court for removing an electronic monitoring device and left a residential alcohol rehabilitation program on 29 October 2019 which formed part of his bail conditions.

Earlier, on 6 November 2019, Snr Const First Class Christopher Hand and Snr Const Lanyon Smith attended another house at Yuendumu to arrest Walker where he often stayed with his partner.

But when the officers tried to arrest Walker in a bedroom, he charged at them with a small axe, but he would drop it after he fled outside. Apparently both Hand and Smith had considerable experience in policing in remote Indigenous communities. When Kumanjayi Walker was armed with that axe, neither Hand, nor Smith, thought it was necessary to draw their guns according to the Prosecutor.

It was claimed in court that Sgt Julie Frost, who was officer in charge of the Yuendumu police station, also had experience in remote communities, and had previously worked in Yuendumu as a nurse would work with the community to negotiate Walker’s surrender. The parents told police Walker had escaped from the rehabilitation facility because he had wanted to attend a great uncle’s funeral, which had been rescheduled to take place on 8 November. It was arranged he would hand himself in after that. But the funeral was again rescheduled to the following day – the same night Walker was shot dead.

Police continued their pursuit of Walker. When Rolfe and his partner entered the property at 7.20pm he was allegedly charged by Walker with an edged weapon (scissors) and stabbed in the left shoulder. It’s alleged the first of the three shots was fired about a minute later as another officer was on top of Walker on a mattress when Rolfe fired the second and third shots, the prosecution told the court. The prosecutor told the court Rolfe’s first shot – which he repeatedly reiterated was not part of the charges against Rolfe – occurred 2.6 seconds before the second shot. He said there was 0.53 seconds between Rolfe’s second and third shots. According to the prosecutor, in policing parlance this terminology this was known as a double-tap and was specifically used when shooting with semi-automatic weapons to inflict maximum damage.

Rolfe is charged with murder in relation to those final two shots. If a jury finds him not guilty of murder, he faces a charge of manslaughter, and if he is found not guilty of that charge, a further charge of engaging in a violent act causing death. Constable Rolfe has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

In analysing the little information available to the public to date, what knows so far is Rolfe and his partner were lawfully attempting to execute a court ordered warrant of arrest on Walker.

The earlier confrontation with Walker by Snr Const First Class Christopher Hand and Snr Const Lanyon Smith Rolfe highlighted that Walker was a violent offender and would use weapons against police to avoid apprehension. This information would have been noted on the NT Police system. In Policing, when information about the violent propensity of an individual and their predisposition to use a weapon against police elevates the level of warrant execution. This means a higher level of capability would be deployed by NT Police given the potential threat. The job was tasked to Immediate Response Team (IRT), a specialist team trained in the apprehension of violent offenders.

The court was told the four-member IRT team, and a member of the dog squad were briefed in Yuendumu about 7pm, and were told they could arrest Mr Walker if they encountered him while gathering information.

Drawing the opposing behaviour of Snr Const First Class Christopher Hand and Snr Const Lanyon Smith in withdrawing from the premises a few days earlier with the behaviour of Constable Rolfe is tenuous. In policing you’re trained to deescalate if the opportunity presents, then cordon and contain with the purpose of negotiating a peaceful surrender. Snr Const First Class Christopher Hand and Snr Const Lanyon Smith were able to do successfully to this and deescalate by removing themselves from within the house out into the open. I’m uncertain why they left the scene when a known violent offender in possession of a weapon and acting aggressively was allowed to remain in the community posing a potential threat to himself, family and his surrounding community.

During used of force training Police are drilled at length in how to deal with a violent offender possessing an edged weapon. In Australia we operate on the use of force continuum-that is de-escalation premised. De-escalation should be the first option for police in a dangerous situation such as this where communication is paramount. If confronted by a person brandishing an edged weapon of any kind, Police are trained on the ‘seven-metre rule’-that is police should remain 7 metres from an armed violent offender whilst attempting to negotiate a surrender. The reason the seven-metre rule is used is that exhaustive testing across the world has shown that it’s virtually impossible for a police officer to draw their weapon and shoot anyone who moves towards them with an edged weapon and would result in serious injury or death.

I personally have been through this training over my career and not once was I able to draw my weapon and shoot once an ‘offender’ got within the seven metres and charging me.

The timing, presented to the court, of multiple shots being fired about one minute following entry into Walkers premises suggests to me there was no time for police to communicate and deescalate, which goes to the intent by walker to severely harm or kill police.

Given that Rolfe has already been stabbed and another officer was on top of Walker there was an grave immediate threat of further harm or death present which required urgent actions to stop that happening.

Police are trained that you can only use lethal force if there is an imminent threat your life or that of another. Once an officer is in that position, he is legally allowed to execute lethal force. You are not authorised in Australia to fire a warning shot; you are not authorised to deliberately wound or ‘wing’ an offender, as by doing so there is an assumption that you as the police officer don’t believe your life or the life of another is in danger. So, police are trained to ‘shoot to kill’. What you can do in cases such as this is having been stabbed by a known violent offender and having lawfully shot him once, Constable Rolfe was justified in continuing to neutralise the life-threatening situation of his partner.

Although the prosecutor stated before the court that ‘the prosecution case, however, would not simply be about the events on the night of the shooting, but about the context in which it occurred’. Police should be judged on the event presenting them at the time, their training and the reasons behind their actions. Looking anachronistically through a lens not taking into consideration the significant processes taking place at the time of the shooting has been a long-standing practice by lawyers to cloud and judge intent through the benefit of hindsight, time and research, something police aren’t able to do in the moment when discharging lethal force.

This is a sad case that potentially could have been prevented. It’s not about race, it’s not about poor training and procedure by police, it’s a case that police across Australia and the world face every day. It’s about police protecting life, and in this case their own. No police officer wants to use lethal force but if your life or that of another is in danger of death, well yes, you’ll have to.

I truly hope that the Warlpiri and their community who are suffering unimaginable pain at the moment of the shooting are able to understand the full context of what the police went through and the consistent course of conduct Mr Walker displayed which would ultimately lead to his death. I hope they receive psychological support they need, as I hope that Constable Rolfe and the other police who were present and their families are supported. The psychological scares left by this incident will eventually heal over, but taking a man’s life and loosing a loved community member will never leave those impacted.