How the Need to Have Statements Witnessed by a Justice of the Peace Disappeared by Greg Early

How the need to have statements witnessed by a Justice of the Peace disappeared – by Greg Early

All former Queensland police officers will remember an amendment to the Justices Act about thirty-five years ago which brought about what became known as 'hand up briefs'. To those who are not familiar with this term, I'll explain it. If statements contained a declaration in a given form and were witnessed by a solicitor, a barrister or a justice of the peace, and the court agreed—usually if the police prosecutor and the defence did not object—they were accepted as declared and without the witness having to give evidence. Police officers were not to know whether this procedure would be adopted with the result that most statements being taken for prosecution purposes were witnessed by a justice of the peace (JP).

As most would recall, that was alright if a civilian at the station was a JP but after hours if a JP would not come to the station the witness had to be taken to the JP and this could be at 1.00 am in the morning. (A Cloncurry Stock Squad member told me once that it was not uncommon for him to have to drive fifty kilometres out and back to have a statement witnessed by a JP.)

You are wondering where I fit into this matter. The officer in charge of the thenThe Gap CIB, Detective Sergeant Noel Hatwell (later to become the Senior Sergeant Tactician at Ferny Grove, later still, the Complaints Inspector at Metropolitan North Region and who unfortunately died from cancer), approached me when I was Assistant Commissioner in charge of the Metropolitan North Region. He had been to New South Wales on police business and observed that police officers there were able to witness statements for court purposes. I asked him to get some details on their procedure and furnish a report direct to me which he did.

I sent the report to the administration of the day and did not hear anything for a couple of months. Noel asked my Executive Secretary one day about the matter. I inquired of the administration and the file could not be found. Luckily, I had kept a copy in my records and another one was duly dispatched to QPS Headquarters.

While I kept the file on bring-up and kept asking HQrs about it, nothing seemed to happen for at least two years although I had been assured that the necessary representations had been made to the Justice Department. I had spoken to Deputy Commissioner Bill Aldrich several times about the matter and he indicated that in Victoria, where he came from, the police force also had had this facility for years.

Mr Denver Beanland, who was then Attorney-General and Minister for Justice in the Coalition Government at the time and who was born in Kilcoy—my home town—was the member for Indooroopilly in the State Parliament. He was very supportive of the Neighbourhood Watch program and Community-Police Consultative Committees in his electorate and I saw him at meetings on a regular basis. He administered the Justices Act so I asked him to have a look at the progress of the amendment which I was assured was being considered. A few days later, someone on his behalf indicated that he did not know a lot about it and asked if I would be able to send in a copy of my file which I did very promptly.

The Minister opined a few weeks after that he was confident that he would be able to get an amendment through Parliament which he did. But instead of having to get statements witnessed by a police officer as had been suggested, no witnessing is required if a declaration in a prepared format is made.

So, for many years police officers did not have the same privilege as solicitors, barristers and JPs, and had to inconvenience witnesses as most former police officers would know. Possibly when that legislation was passed, police officers were not, in the eyes of the legislation drafters and makers, up to the standard of the former three or could not be trusted.

I am not aware of the vote in the house because at that time the government was relying on the vote of Ms Liz Cunningham, MLA for Gladstone, to have legislation considered. It would not surprise me if some Labor members voted in favour of it because I had spoken to Mr Tom Barton, MLA, when he was Shadow Minister for Police about the proposed amendment and he could see no reason for him or his colleagues to oppose it. One can see the results of a persistent subordinate and his boss being prepared to keep on keeping on about something that has benefited all police officers.