Juror given OK to stay despite sister being a cop
THE sister of one of the 12 men and women who acquitted Territory cop Zach Rolfe of murdering an Indigenous teenager is a serving NT Police officer, it can be revealed.
Constable Rolfe was found not guilty in the Supreme Court on Friday of murdering Kumanjayi Walker, 19, in Yuendumu in 2019, following a five-week trial.
But what was kept from 11 of the 12 jurors was a discussion held in their absence on February 8, a day after the trial started, when Justice John Burns received a note.
“I apologise, I should have said something yesterday, however I do not do well with large audiences and was extremely nervous,” the note read.
“For your information and consideration with my place on the jury, my sister is a police officer/constable for the NT Police.”
The juror was brought into court on her own, where Justice Burns asked her whether her relationship with her sister would affect her ability to approach the evidence in the trial.
“You say (in your note) your sister is a police officer, or a constable for the Northern Territory Police,” Justice Burns said.
“You explain why you didn’t say so yesterday, but what I need to know is do you
feel that your relationship with your sister is going to cause you difficulty in approaching the evidence in this trial in an unbiased way?”
“I don’t think so,” the juror said.
In response to further questioning, the juror clarified that she thought it was important to bring her sister’s employment to the court’s attention but did not believe it would affect her approach to the evidence.
After no objection was raised by Crown prosecutor, Philip Strickland SC, or defence barrister, David Edwardson QC, Justice Burns took no further action and the trial continued.
During empanelment, one potential juror was excused after declaring he was himself
a former NT Police officer and another was excused due to the fact her sister was a serving officer with Victoria Police.
Then, on February 15, after closing the court, Justice Burns told jurors a separate matter relating to a different juror had arisen and needed to be dealt with.
“It has now been dealt with,” he said.
“I have discharged that juror from the jury and the trial will proceed with the remaining jurors.”
As the second juror was not a reserve, they had to be replaced with a reserve and the trial continued.
Another juror was later excused due to Covid-19, leaving only 12 of the original 14 member panel, including two reserves.