Officer used excessive force on protester — IPCA decision

A senior officer at Parliament’s antimandate protest has been found to have likely kneeled on a woman’s neck and head, contradicting a criminal investigation which broadly cleared him of wrongdoing.

While police determined the officer’s actions were “in line with current police practice relating to arrest procedures”, the Independent Police Conduct Authority found the force was “unnecessary and excessive” and made different factual findings.

The criminal investigation into his actions resulted in police declining to lay charges against its officer.

The officer, whom NZME i s not naming, was responsible for excessive force in three separate arrests at Parliament on February 10, according to the IPCA decision released on Thursday.

He is currently facing legal action in the High Court, after two protesters launched a civil claim.

The three arrests included a seminaked woman being held down by an officer with his knee on her neck or shoulders, and a “press up” on the head of two protesters — one aged 17.

The three protesters complained to police, who launched an investigation. NZME obtained the criminal investigation report into the officer, which included summaries of police interviews with the officer, witnesses and experts.

Police ultimately concluded the threshold to lay charges wasn’t met in all three cases.

In the most widely publicised arrest of the occupation, semi- naked woman Laura Cassin was dragged from the crowd after covering herself in coconut oil. The officer in question kneeled on her as other officers handcuffed her.

The officer told both the criminal investigation and the IPCA that he kneeled on Cassin’s back and shoulder area, fervently denying his knee was on her neck or head.

The criminal investigation broadly agreed, concluding the officer kneeled on her back and shoulders.

There was no mention of a knee on her neck or head, but the report said it was not conclusive whether or not his shin was on her neck. There was no mention of kneeling on the woman’s head in the investigation’s summary.

But the IPCA took a different view, saying based on the video footage, it was likely the officer placed his knee on her neck and head for a short period.

“There was no need for [ the officer] to involve himself with this arrest and his use of force was unnecessary and excessive,” the IPCA said.

The criminal investigation report took a less critical view.

“It could be argued that [ the officer] had no cause to assist with this arrest, due to Cassin being face- down and under control. Even though the officers were in control, [ the officer’s] involvement was not unusual or unwelcomed.

“His actions pertaining to kneeling on her shoulder area and his body placement were in line with current police practice relating to arrest procedures.”

Despite the officer claiming to both the IPCA and the criminal investigator that Cassin was resisting arrest, both investigations found she was not.

Dr Judy Melanik, an internationally respected forensic pathologist, provided her view on the force against Cassin as part of the criminal investigation.

She said covering Cassin’s face with a blanket meant her breathing couldn’t be assessed. Pressure placed on the head and neck was “potentially life- threatening” had it led to injuries.

One of the detainees was 17- yearold Alexander Lawrence. Both the criminal and IPCA investigations found he wasn’t resisting arrest, despite the officer claiming he was.

Both Cassin and Lawrence have launched a civil claim against the officer in the High Court.