Allegations of police misconduct during Recruit 313 project revealed in Philip Strickland’s probe of ICAC investigation

The alleged misconduct at the centre of one of the anti-corruption watchdog’s most controversial investigations can be revealed for the first time.

A prospective police recruit “closely connected” to a senior officer progressed through the force’s application process despite twice failing the interview stage after Police Commissioner Grant Stevens intervened, a complaint to ICAC alleges.

Inspector Philip Strickland SC’s review of an ICAC investigation into Chief Superintendent Douglas Barr’s conduct during a 2016/17 SA Police recruitment drive shows the corruption watchdog found the enlistment process was “not free of nepotism”.

For the first time it can be revealed that ICAC found some applicants were given preferential treatment because they were related to, or friends with, senior officers.

Some had their applications progressed even though they had been rejected or not recommended to proceed, and some were permitted to advance through the process even though they did not meet the prerequisites.

Others had places saved for them in cadet courses and some had their applications fast-tracked.

Chief Superintendent Doug Barr took his own life in 2019 while under scrutiny over the Recruit 313 project. Picture: Dean Martin

Mr Strickland’s report also showed Mr Stevens gave Superintendent Barr “extensive latitude” to achieve the goals of Recruit 313, which allowed him to “go outside the scope of existing policies”.

The report stated Mr Stevens told ICAC that Superintendent Barr was still obliged to follow the rules that prohibited nepotism and patronage.

Recruit 313 aimed to bring 313 new officers into the force and ran for 10 months from September 2016.

Superintendent Barr ran the recruitment drive and he and another officer were investigated by ICAC over their handling of it.

In his report, Mr Strickland revealed allegations against Superintendent Barr including that he provided confidential information about recruitment processes, including interview questions, to an applicant and another applicant’s father and obtained or sought access to an application including interview outcomes.

Inspector Philip Strickland SC cleared ICAC of any wrongdoing in its investigation into alleged police misconduct during the Recruit 313 project. Picture: Julianne Osborne

Superintendent Barr was also alleged to have reserved a place for an applicant and provided links to online practice tests to other applicants.

The ICAC investigation – which began as a corruption probe but later became a misconduct inquiry – was blamed for Mr Barr’s suicide in October 2019, and triggered the controversial weakening of the watchdog’s powers.

Mr Strickland, in his report tabled in state parliament last month, cleared ICAC of any wrongdoing. However, he found that the investigation into Superintendent Barr was protracted, and this delay took a psychological toll on the officer.

Mr Strickland stated it was not an “unreasonable delay” but did recommend that ICAC implement targets or KPIs in relation to investigation time frames.

ICAC’s secrecy laws restricted the reporting of this case, however it can now be revealed exactly what the watchdog was probing and what it found after Mr Strickland outlined the allegations in his publicly available report.

Mr Strickland’s report shows ICAC found almost a dozen applicants who were either related to senior police officers, or were closely connected to senior officers, received special treatment during Recruit 313.

The Advertiser previously revealed in December 2021 that one of the applicants was a relative of Mr Stevens.

Mr Stevens did not intervene in his relative’s application and there is no suggestion of wrongdoing by him.

ICAC was told Police Commissioner Grant Stevens got involved in the recruitment process of an applicant “closely connected” to Superintendent Barr. Picture: NCA NewsWire/Brenton Edwards

However, the report states ICAC was told Mr Stevens got involved in the recruitment of another applicant, who was “closely connected” to Superintendent Barr.

It states that the prospective cadet was interviewed during Recruit 313 and it was determined that his application should not be progressed.

Superintendent Barr, who had not declared a conflict of interest in relation to the applicant, requested that the applicant be reinterviewed and this occurred, with two different officers conducting the interview.

The applicant was again deemed unsuitable.

“According to the source, the Commissioner of Police told Officer 2 to review Applicant 11’s file, as someone should not be deemed unsuitable based on their interview,” Mr Strickland’s report read.

SA Police cadets graduate during a ceremony at the Fort Largs Police Academy earlier this month. Picture: NCA NewsWire/Brenton Edwards

“Officer 2 reviewed Applicant 11’s file and considered him suitable to progress to the next stage of the process … the source had heard from recruiting staff that Applicant 11 might not have been undergoing the psychological or medical testing and might ‘be passed straight through’.”

Superintendent Barr’s son Christopher said he was disappointed the review, which his family sought, repeated allegations against his father.

“My father never had the opportunity, as was his right, to challenge these allegations, nor to freely examine any evidence or cross examine any witnesses,” he said.

“These allegations have gone untested and unchallenged, and some I know for a fact to be blatantly false.”

Mr Barr said he felt “as though we have been punished for asking for this review”.

Superintendent Barr’s wife Debbie Barr blamed the ICAC investigation for her husband’s death. Picture: Naomi Jellicoe

Mr Stevens said SA Police would implement the four recommendations made by ICAC to improve its policies relating to conflicts of interest and the Code of Conduct.

“It should be also noted that the report also found no wrongdoing by the applicants or Commissioner of Police,” he said.

Then-ICAC boss Bruce Lander KC made no findings of misconduct or maladministration against Superintendent Barr, who would not have been afforded procedural fairness should findings have been made after his death.

“Mr Lander accepted that Chief Superintendent Barr was entitled to be afforded procedural fairness and the right to be heard, and that the obligation to afford procedural fairness to Chief Superintendent Barr had not been discharged at the time of his death,” Mr Strickland wrote.

Mr Lander, quoted in Mr Strickland’s report, said any findings of fact made against Superintendent Barr were made “because I consider they were necessary in order for me to discharge my duties as Commissioner and because I consider it was in the public interest to make those findings.”