Police Commissioner Jamie Chalker has refused to say whether the original police coronial reports into the shooting death of Kumanjayi Walker by Constable Zach Rolfe will be presented at the upcoming coronial inquiry, or if police are investigating how and why their existence was suppressed from the prosecutor and the Rolfe defence team.

An investigation into the 2019 death in Yuedumu – during an attempted arrest by Immediate Response Team members Constable Rolfe and then-constable Adam Eberl – was undertaken by Coronial Senior Investigating Officer Detective Superintendent Scott Pollock.

But it in one court reference it was described as seven draft reports, with sources telling the NT Independent the Supt Pollock’s investigation was suspended by Assistant Commissioner Nick Anticich in November 2020.

He had been seconded to the Coroner’s office to create the report.

One police source told the NT Independent Police Commissioner Jamie Chalker called Supt Pollock into his office by himself and asked him to change the contents of the report.

It was said by the source Mr Chalker then transferred Supt Pollock to the police response to COVID-19 and then transferred again before he went on leave, which he is still on.

His report was later altered by Commander David Proctor, who replaced Supt Pollock.

“[Pollock] should be on workers comp but won’t do it,” they said.

“He is scared to be on the phone as he thinks the phone is being monitored. He accuses Chalker of being corrupt. Is a broken man over this matter.”

Mr Chalker refused to answer questions from the NT Independent about the report and any actions he or other senior officers took to have the report changed and whose decision it was to suppress it. He was also asked the Special References Unit, were investigating why the reports were allegedly changed how the reports came to be not disclosed to the court.

But in a June court hearing over the documents, Mr Chalker’s lawyer Mary Chalmers refuted claims Mr Chalker had intentionally withheld the reports.

Another source also said the report “would be on a hard drive somewhere” and suggested Mr Chalker, Mr Anticich, Deputy Commissioner Murray Smalpage, and Deputy Commissioner Michael Murphy would have seen the report.

“I believe they changed the write-up of the axe incident as ‘courageous’ for not defending themselves and allowing him to escape,” one source said.

“They are recommending that the two officers at the axe incident be recognised for their ‘bravery’.”

“I don’t know why they can’t write everything exactly as it happened. No narrative just the facts.”

Another source said the type of investigator Supt Pollock was, would mean he would not just have emailed the reports to Mr Chalker and that they would be officially documented in the NT Police system.

“It would very much be in existence,” they said.

“It is up to legal counsel and Chalker about which report is presented to the coronial. Realistically, both (Pollock’s and Proctor’s reports) should be tabled. Never in the history of NT Police have they ever done two coronial reports.

“This report would have been reviewed by a superintendent or Assistant Commissioner who sits over major crime and the coronal sections. And then that person would have sent it to Chalker for review.”

“It is most likely not the [report] to be filed with the Coroner’s Court.”

The legal fight to bring the documents to light

In May last year, before the murder trial was due to begin in July, Constable Rolfe’s lawyer David Edwardson, told trial judge Acting Justice Dean Mildren that he had recently discovered the existence of crucial reports that had not been disclosed to the defence or the DPP.

Mr Edwardson said Mr Chalker had refused “not only the existence, but also the production of these materials on the basis that we could not demonstrate a legitimate forensic purpose’”, adding that the reports contained relevant information about the shootings, including Mr Rolfe’s police training.

The defence subpoenaed the reports as well as “other documents” that would connect the reports “together with other communications between various senior police officers as to the creation of that report, why those reports were so important and the like”.

But in a June 4, 2021 hearing, Crown prosecutor Sophie Callan then made an application to the court for any references to the Pollock reports – and claims that they were intentionally withheld – be suppressed from being reported by the media due to concerns it could taint a potential jury in the upcoming trial.

Mr Chalker’s legal counsel, Mary Chalmers, refuted claims that Mr Chalker had intentionally withheld the reports.

“That’s simply not the case,” she said. “The assertion is refuted to the extent that there’s a suggestion that something nefarious has gone on.”

The judge rejected the suppression application, and Mr Edwards said they had “only recently handed over in part, with large sections redacted”.

Ms Chalmers told the court police had provided the “vast bulk of the material” including redacted versions of the draft coronial reports.

Also in June, The Australian reported Mr Edwardson told the judge there were seven draft reports prepared by Supt Pollock, and those reports contradicted prosecution expert opinions that were going to be relied upon in the criminal case.

The two experts were University of South Carolina criminologist Dr Geoffrey Alpert and NT Police use of force witness Detective Senior Sergeant Andrew Barram. Only Mr Barram appeared at the trial.

“What the DPP and the NT Police did not disclose was that Mr Pollock had considered all of the reports, both of those reports, and set out in detail in the draft reports why those expert opinions were misconceived, ill-informed, and wrong,” the paper reported Mr Edwardson told the court.

“Assistant Commissioner (Nick) Anticich, it would seem, who was instrumental in the charges preferred against my client, is the person who ultimately stopped the progression of that (coronial) report because it was inconsistent with the case that they wanted to present, that is the prosecution case.

“Effectively (Supt Pollock) has been stopped from completing his task for fear that it would compromise the criminal prosecution, in particular the expert witnesses that they chose to rely on for the purposes of this prosecution.”

Also in that hearing, Mr Edwardson further said that the Pollock reports that were in draft form were “seized” and edited by the officer in charge of the criminal matter, Detective Superintendent Kirk Pennuto.

“The Coronial inquiry was the province of Mr Pollock, who created the report or the draft reports, they were then seized by Mr Pennuto, and it’s Mr Pennuto who then sought to try and, as it were, edit the Pollock reports,” Mr Edwardson said.

The Australian reported unredacted minutes of a meeting between Mr Anticich, Commander David Proctor and Supt Pollock on November 27, 2020 were also sought by the defence.

“And it’s in that context that of course the Pollock report or reports were not completed,” Mr Edwardson said.

“Effectively, (Supt Pollock) was stopped from completing his task for fear that it would compromise the criminal prosecution and in particular, the expert witnesses that they chose to rely on for the purposes of this prosecution.”

More information is expected to be revealed on Friday, when suppression orders on certain material from the Supreme Court trial are lifted.