Crime and Misconduct Commission v Assistant Commissioner Rynders & Frazer [2010] QCAT 440

CITATION: Crime and Misconduct Commission v Assistant Commissioner Rynders & Frazer [2010] QCAT 440 PARTIES: Crime and Misconduct Commission v Mr Graham Rynders – Assistant Commissioner & Mr Jeffrey Frazer APPLICATION NUMBER: OCR126-10 MATTER TYPE: Occupational regulation matters HEARING DATE: On the papers HEARD AT: Brisbane DECISION OF: Richard Oliver – Senior Member DELIVERED ON: 2 September 2010 DELIVERED AT: Brisbane ORDERS MADE: 1. The decision of Assistant Commissioner Rynders made 13 May 2010 is amended as follows: (a) by deleting “2.8” and substituting in lieu thereof “2.7”, and; (b) by deleting “six (6) months” and inserting in lieu thereof “twelve (12) months” CATCHWORDS : Disciplinary proceedings; whether sanction imposed on the second respondent adequate; recognition by second respondent of misconduct and an acceptance that further sanction is warranted in the circumstances; decision of the first respondent amended. APPEARANCES and REPRESENTATION (if any): Decision on the papers. -- 1 of 3 -- REASONS FOR DECISION 1. On 14 November 2009, Senior Constable Frazer was involved in an incident at the Caloundra police station. After a social function he and a group of people, some of whom were acquaintances, went to the police station to collect his car and some supplies of alcohol with the intention to return to his home. However, once there, they decided to stay and consumed alcohol in the social club area of the police station until about 4.30 in the morning. Of concern, some of these people had questionable backgrounds and the security of the police station was compromised. All of this was done in the absence of the express permission of the officer in charge, which Senior Constable Frazer knew, was necessary if civilians were to utilise the social club facilities. 2. These events resulted in an investigation by Queensland Police Ethical Standards Command. As a result of that investigation, disciplinary proceedings were brought against Senior Constable Frazer. He candidly accepted he had engaged in the misconduct alleged, and on 13 May 2010 Assistant Commissioner Graham Rynders made a decision to sanction Senior Constable Frazer. The sanction was in the following terms: i) I order a reduction of your salary from paypoint 2.9 to paypoint 2.8 pursuant to the provisions of s.10(c) of the Police Service (Discipline) Regulations 1990 for a period of six (6) months from the date of service of this notice. 3. The Crime and Misconduct Commission (“the Commission”) has applied to the Tribunal seeking a review of the decision imposing the sanction on the grounds that it was, in all the circumstances, inadequate and disproportionate to Senior Constable Frazer’s admitted improper conduct. The Commission contends that the sanction imposed did not properly reflect the purpose of disciplinary proceedings by not protecting the public, upholding ethical standards in the Queensland Police Service, and promoting and maintaining confidence in the Queensland Police Service. 1 4. After the application for review was filed in the Tribunal, the matter proceeded to a compulsory conference under division 2 of the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 2009 (“the Act”). Having conducted the compulsory conference, the parties have agreed to waive their rights, pursuant to section 73 of the Act, to object to me determining this matter on the papers. 5. Having regard to the circumstances giving rise to the disciplinary proceeding for misconduct to which Senior Constable Frazer was sanctioned, it became tolerably clear that the sanction imposed was inadequate. Taking into account the seriousness of his conduct, Senior Constable Frazer’s years of service with the police in both New South Wales and Queensland without blemish, and other mitigating factors submitted by him to Assistant Commissioner Rynders, an appropriate sanction is, in my view, to double the paypoint deduction and impose it’s 1 Application Part C. and s. 219A Crime and Misconduct Act 2001. -- 2 of 3 -- application for twice the period. That is, to reduce Senior Constable Frazer’s salary from paypoint 2.9 to paypoint 2.7 for a period of 12 months. Neither of the parties oppose an amendment of Assistant Commissioner Rynder’s decision to reflect these reasons. 6. Therefore, pursuant to section 23(2)(b)(b)(iii) of the Act, the decision of the Tribunal will be that the sanction imposed by Assistant Commissioner Rynders made on 13 May 2010 be amended by deleting “2.1” and substituting in lieu thereof “2.7” and further, by deleting “six (6) months” and inserting in lieu thereof “twelve (12) months”, to be effective from 15 May 2010, being the date of service of the original notice. -- 3 of 3 --