Commissioner of Police v Hill [1997] AFPDT 1

Commissioner of Police v Hill [1997] AFPDT 1

The Tribunal found that the prosecution failed to establish, on the balance of probabilities and considering the seriousness of the allegations and the standard in Briginshaw v Briginshaw, that the defendant deliberately sprayed capsicum gas at the bus or knowingly made false and misleading statements. The preponderance of credible witness testimony, forensic evidence, character assessments, and lack of credible motive or cover-up resulted in findings of not guilty on all charges.

Parties
Prosecution: Commissioner of Police; Defendant: Constable Peter Ross Hill
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 January 1997
Procedural Posture
Disciplinary Tribunal / Reasons for Decision After Hearing
Outcome
not guilty
Legal Topics
Disciplinary Proceedings, Misconduct Allegations, Evidentiary Standards, Burden of Proof
Administrative Law Police Discipline Disciplinary Proceedings Misconduct Allegations Evidentiary Standards Burden of Proof

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Commissioner of Police

Prosecution

Constable Peter Ross Hill

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Disciplinary Tribunal / Reasons for Decision After Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Constable Peter Ross Hill committed the offence of disgraceful conduct by fabricating evidence regarding the discharge of a capsicum spray can
  2. 2 Whether Constable Hill knowingly made false and misleading statements in two interviews regarding the cause and circumstances of the can's discharge
  3. 3 Whether the evidence established deliberate intent and cover-up by the defendant and Mr Grace

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal found that the prosecution failed to establish, on the balance of probabilities and considering the seriousness of the allegations and the standard in Briginshaw v Briginshaw, that the defendant deliberately sprayed capsicum gas at the bus or knowingly made false and misleading statements. The preponderance of credible witness testimony, forensic evidence, character assessments, and lack of credible motive or cover-up resulted in findings of not guilty on all charges.

Court Disposition

not guilty

Orders

  • The defendant, Constable Peter Ross Hill, is found not guilty of the charges of disgraceful conduct and knowingly making false and misleading statements.