The Office of the ICAC has closed its investigation into five TRG officers lying to the court in sworn statements about racist award certificates with no adverse findings because of promises made by Commissioner Michael Riches before he collected any evidence, which later led to evidence that contradicts the officers not being admissible, a new investigation report shows.

Riches – who is currently suspended while under investigation himself for alleged inappropriate behaviour towards female staffers – told Police Commissioner Michael Murphy a day after starting his investigation into the lying officers in March that he would not be making any adverse findings against the TRG members.

The new investigation report, authored by South Australia judge Patricia Kelly, shows Riches pledged not to make adverse findings because he was concerned it would create “adversarial positions” which could delay the investigation and instead “requested” that officers providing evidence tell the truth.

He later also pledged to “offer certain protections” to those who cooperated with the inquiry, which led to evidence being collected that could not be used to pursue charges against the officers for lying on oath to the courts, according to the report.

Ms Kelly wrote that she is in possession of evidence and statements that “tend to contradict some of the statements made by the five police officers mainly with reference to the origin and meaning of the ‘Nugedah’ award”, but has chosen not to pursue the matter further due to Riches’ earlier pledges.

The report also found that the NT Police went to the Director of Public Prosecutions before the ICAC’s part of the joint investigation was finalised – at some point before September 4, 2024 – seeking advice on whether there was enough evidence to charge any of the five TRG officers with any offence, but did not include the evidence “then in the possession of the OICAC”.

The Office of the DPP said there was insufficient evidence to charge any of the five officers “with any offence” on September 4, which Ms Kelly found was “reasonable, if not inevitable” because their brief did not include “a number of declarations” from former and current police officers that contradicted the officers’ sworn statements.

The issue of the racist Nuggadah awards were first raised in February during the coronial inquest into the death of Kumanjayi Walker by Zach Rolfe, who said he was aware of racist award certificates being handed out by TRG members at their annual dinner, also called the “coon of the year” awards, with the winner being given a “caveman club” with nails in it that was later revealed to be a makeshift weapon sized during riots in Wadeye.

That sparked the five senior officers – Meacham King, Craig Garland, James Gray-Spence, Shaun Gil and Mark Clemmons – to write statutory declarations to the court claiming the Noogadah award had no racist connotation.

But the next day at the inquest, certificates were presented that backed up Mr Rolfe’s assertions, including a certificate from 2013 with a backdrop of an Aboriginal flag. This was followed by others, including one award for the “most coon-like BBQ ever”, images of people in blackface and one Noogadah award given to a drunk officer for displaying the “utmost level of Aboriginality while being an elite member of the TR[G]”.

Evidence could not be put to lying officers because of Riches’ ‘assurances’ and pre-investigation promises

Riches initially could not access any electronic police records created before 2015, and in May, put out a statement calling on anyone with further evidence from personal computers to come forward.

Ms Kelly found that based on his previous assurances that witnesses’ identities would not be disclosed, further witnesses provided more “relevant information”.

Riches then sought legal advice from the Solicitor General’s office about the use of the information he obtained, with the advice appearing to indicate, according to Ms Kelly, that they could not be disclosed to the police or the DPP because of his pledges.

“For that reason, none of the declarations provided by police officers or former police officers as a consequence of the assurances given by Commissioner Riches were disclosed to the police or the Director of Public Prosecutions,” she wrote.

That also meant that the five TRG officers who lied to the court could not have the evidence put to them by Riches, again because of his previous assurances that the evidence he collected would not be disclosed.

Ms Kelly said she reached the conclusion – based in part on Riches’ original letter to Mr Murphy before the investigation even started – that there is no point investigating the racist awards or that the five officers lied about them, “at least in so far [as] it would involve pursuing the truthfulness or otherwise of the declarations…”.

She added that there was no point pursuing the truth because “none of the five police officers have had any opportunity to read or comment on” the material that Riches was sitting on.

“It hardly needs to be stated that before making any adverse findings about any of the statements made by those police officers that they must be given the opportunity to answer the allegations which have been made which contradict their sworn declarations,” Ms Kelly wrote.

“That factor alone makes it impossible and inappropriate for me to make any adverse findings about the allegations against them.”

It was not explained anywhere in the report why the five officers were not questioned about the evidence provided to the inquest that was made public and ran in all media that directly contradicted their statutory declarations.

Ms Kelly noted that the evidence of the award certificates from 2007, 2013 and 2015 “are evidently on their face racist” and that it is “difficult to conclude how many person of reasonable intelligence could conclude otherwise”, but then does not equate those to the five officers who lied about the nature of the awards.

Ms Kelly devoted the rest of her investigation report into general statements about “historical” racism in the NT Police, but failed again to address in her conclusion the major issue of five senior Territory Response Group officers lying to the courts, or the implications of that fact for the police force’s credibility.

She also incorrectly claimed in the report that “there has not been any evidence of any further racist conduct or material produced after 2015”, which was debunked by counsel assisting the Coroner Peggy Dwyer back in May, when she pointed out that the TRG by their own admission only changed the name of the Nuggadah award in 2022 to the “Voldemort” award.

Mr Murphy said at the time that it was “concerning” that the racist term “Noogadah” was still being used in 2022.

Ms Kelly ended her report stating that she agreed with Riches’ letter to Mr Murphy before gathering evidence that “what is now important, is that positive action be taken to prevent any further such conduct in the future”. She added that positive action included Mr Murphy apologising to Aboriginal Territorians for past racism in the police force and hiring Leanne Liddle to drive policy reforms affecting Indigenous Territorians.

“I am satisfied that there is no utility in investigating this matter any further, the investigation should be closed,” she wrote.

Mr Murphy issued a statement on Thursday saying the NT Police accepts the conclusions of the report.

“The ICAC concluded that there is no admissible evidence of any conduct of the five named police officers which warrants any further investigation of any potential charge against them,” he said.

“The Northern Territory Police Force has made and will continue to make significant strides in driving institutional change. We are committed to creating and delivering on a culture of safety, integrity, accountability, and professionalism. There is no place for racism or discrimination within our ranks.

“The Northern Territory Police Force remain fully committed to maintaining public trust and ensuring that any concerns raised are thoroughly investigated and appropriately addressed.”