Crime Commission knew agent had lied in court, records reveal

September 30 2012

Neil Mercer 

IT WAS August, 2000. A massive covert investigation into NSW Police corruption, called Operation Mascot, was in full swing.

Run by three bodies - NSW police from within the Special Crime and Internal Affairs unit, the NSW Crime Commission and the Police Integrity Commission - it had been going since February the previous year. It depended heavily on a corrupt NSW police officer, codenamed M5, who was working undercover, recording his colleagues.

But secret Crime Commission documents obtained by The Sun-Herald reveal that at least two of those agencies knew on August 23, 2000, that they had a serious problem.

The problem was this: M5, who was working for SCIA and the Crime Commission, had privately admitted to his superiors that in order to obtain search warrants he had told lies in court.

The documents show that at a meeting on August 23, 2000, M5 admitted his perjury to a senior SCIA officer, Detective Superintendent John Dolan, and to the then assistant director of investigations at the NSW Crime Commission, Mark Standen.

They also reveal that another SCIA officer, the then Detective Inspector Cath Burn, compiled an "information report" about the matter on September 5 that year.

The Sun-Herald has been unable to establish whether the magistrate was ever informed that M5 had admitted lying in court.

The document says: ''[M5] informed Dolan/Standen that he swore information in support of an application for a search warrant [integrity test] knowing that information to be false.

"[He] said that he was very sorry for his actions and is aware of the problem it presents.''
The Sun-Herald does not suggest Ms Burn is corrupt.

On Friday morning, The Sun-Herald sent a series of questions to Ms Burn, now a NSW Police Deputy Commissioner. Through her lawyers Commissioner Burn issued a statement saying she was ''under an obligation not to disclose information or to make comment … as any disclosure would constitute a criminal offence due to the secrecy provisions of the NSW Crime Commission''.

Mr Dolan is no longer in the police and could not be contacted. Mark Standen, once the crime commission's top investigator, was not available for comment. He is serving a 22-year jail term for an unrelated matter - planning a 300-kilogram drug importation.

The latest leak to The Sun-Herald follows revelations reported in recent weeks about unethical, improper or illegal activities by some officers within SCIA.

The state government has so far rejected calls for an independent judicial inquiry, saying the matters are under investigation by the Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission, the former Supreme Court judge David Levine.

But Mr Levine himself has said he is simply assessing whether the recommendations of Strike Force Emblems, or its report, can be publicly released.

STRIKE FORCE EMBLEMS REPORT

 

LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL

Wednesday 12 September 2012

The President (The Hon. Donald Thomas Harwin) took the chair at 11.00 a.m.

The President read the Prayers.

Mr DAVID SHOEBRIDGE: I direct my question without notice to the Minister for Police and Emergency Services. Given the recent revelations about police wire-tapping operations that were reviewed in the Strike Force Emblems report, has the Minister asked the Commissioner of Police why he has not read this critical report on past police practice? If not, why not?

The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: Members are aware of the response I have given thus far in relation to this matter. I can recall telling members some years ago that I would release the recommendations contained in the Emblems report. But I realised, having read the recommendations when I became the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, that if those recommendations were released in the form in which they are recorded in that report, it would not be possible for anyone to determine them as conclusive. For that reason, in May of this year I asked the independent Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission, Mr David Levine, QC, to examine whether the recommendations contained in the Emblems report had been satisfactorily implemented and whether those recommendations may be made available to the public. The Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission is the appropriate authority to conduct such a review— Mr David Shoebridge: Point of order: My point of order is relevance. The question is about why the Commissioner of Police has not read the Strike Force Emblems report. It is not about a referral history to the Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission.

The PRESIDENT: Order! There is no point of order.

The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: The Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission is the appropriate authority to conduct such a review—a fact supported and accepted by the New South Wales Police Association. The Premier, who was responsible for the Police Integrity Commission Act, has further asked the Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission whether the Emblems report can be publicly released in its entirety. This request has been made in the interests of openness and transparency and to put to rest lingering concerns over this decade-old matter. The Government has no intention of changing its timetable because of dangerous leaks to the media. Justice Levine will consider the Emblems report in whatever time frame he requires and with whatever support he requests from the Government. My priority is to ensure that, whatever happens, investigations into serious organised crime and corruption are not compromised, that the identity of human sources—informants—is protected, and that the lives of officers who investigate serious crimes are not threatened by the release of highly protected information concerning police investigations. I imagine all members would share those priorities. With that in mind I ask that Justice Levine be given the time he needs to complete his inquiries. In response to Mr David Shoebridge's point as to why the Commissioner of Police has not read the report, I suggest that he take the opportunity to ask the commissioner that himself during the estimates hearings.

Mr DAVID SHOEBRIDGE: I ask a supplementary question. Will the Minister elucidate his answer by advising the House whether or not the Government will commit to releasing Justice Levine's report in full when it is received? The Hon. Matthew Mason-Cox: Point of order: That was not a supplementary question. It was a new question.

The PRESIDENT: Order! The question is in order.

The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER: As Mr David Shoebridge well knows, the Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission is able to print, publish and publicly release his or her own report. I will await Mr Levine's finding, but Mr David Shoebridge can take it from me that I want to make sure that this matter is put to rest once and for all. I am sick and tired of the innuendo, the suggestions of conspiracies. I want to see this matter put to rest just as much as Mr David Shoebridge and all the parties involved do. But I want to ensure that is done by a significant figure who will look at the evidence and make the determinations, not by politicians or others who may well have an interest in the matter.