The loss of life of Kumanjayi Walker was a tragedy however he was “the writer of his personal misfortune”, and the jury should not discover constable Zachary Rolfe responsible of his homicide, a court docket has been instructed.
David Edwardson SC, the defence barrister for Rolfe, stated on Wednesday in his closing tackle in Rolfe’s homicide trial that the Northern Territory police officer had acted courageously when he shot Walker and had been topic to a “flawed prosecution”.
Rolfe shot Walker 3 times whereas attempting to arrest him on 9 November 2019 within the distant group of Yuendumu, about 300km from Alice Springs.
Rolfe is charged in relation to the second and third photographs fired at Walker, a 19-year-old Warlpiri man. Rolfe has pleaded not responsible and is defending his actions on the premise they had been justified in mild of the chance that Walker, who had stabbed Rolfe with scissors instantly earlier than the taking pictures, posed to him and a colleague, Adam Eberl.
“This case is tragic,” Edwardson stated.
“A younger man misplaced his life, and a younger brave police officer has been charged with probably the most severe offence below the legal justice system … with none correct investigation, and that may be a shame.”
Edwardson used his tackle to criticise the manager of the Northern Territory police and three of the witnesses for the prosecution.
He described Det Sr Sgt Andrew Barram, a senior NT police officer who reviewed the taking pictures, as neither credible nor dependable.
He argued Barram “stood alone” in questioning Rolfe’s response because it associated to his coaching and was “undoubtedly probably the most controversial witness”. He described Barram as a “mouthpiece for the manager” who had been “wheeled out” in “doubtful circumstances” to bolster the shortage of a “significant investigation”, given Rolfe was charged solely 4 days after the taking pictures.
He requested the jury to think about who they might fairly have their again in a scenario comparable to that confronted by Eberl on the evening of the taking pictures: Rolfe or the “armchair skilled” Barram.
Edwardson’s tackle got here on the ultimate full day of the trial, with the decide, John Burns, indicating he anticipated the jury would be capable to retire to think about its verdict by tomorrow afternoon.
He urged the jury to disregard makes an attempt by the prosecution to point out footage of the taking pictures incident frame-by-frame, describing it as “harmful” and “wholly unrealistic”.
He additionally urged them to disregard proof about whether or not Rolfe had acted outdoors his coaching or orders on the evening of the taking pictures.
“What this trial is just not about is a breach of common orders, some kind of non-compliance with orders or poor tactical consciousness … it's [about] what Zachary Rolfe noticed, heard, felt, and perceived when he made that important determination.”
Edwardson stated the prosecution’s suggestion that Rolfe had lied about seeing Eberl being stabbed by Walker and seeing Walker’s hand on his gun was absurd – and confirmed their “true colors”.
He sought to obviously outline the menace posed by Walker, who he stated was a “harmful” and “violent” younger man with a prolonged legal file who was the “writer of his personal misfortune”.
He additionally accused the prosecution of “pandering to the notion” that Rolfe ought to have “someway handled Kumanjayi Walker with child gloves”.
“As tragic because it may be that a younger man died as a consequence of his behaviour … in these circumstances, there can solely be one verdict and that may solely be not responsible of all costs.”
The trial continues.
Post a Comment