High Court’s full bench to hear arguments about police immunity in Zach Rolfe murder trial

The highly anticipated murder trial of NT Police officer Zach Rolfe will be delayed further after the High Court agreed to hear a prosecution challenge about whether he can claim immunity from criminal liability under Territory law.

THE highly anticipated murder trial of NT Police officer Zach Rolfe will be delayed further after the High Court agreed to hear a prosecution challenge about whether he can claim immunity from criminal liability under Territory law.

Rolfe has pleaded not guilty to murdering 19-year-old Aboriginal man Kumanjayi Walker during a botched attempted arrest in the outback community of Yuendumu in 2019.

The High Court on Friday decided to allow the Crown to present their arguments as to why it says the defence should not be put to the jury, which will now be heard by the court’s full bench.

On the eve of the trial the prosecution sought special leave from the High Court to appeal a decision made by the NT Supreme Court’s full bench about whether Rolfe could claim the immunity.

That broad defence means prosecutors have to prove Rolfe was not acting in “good faith” in the course of his duties when he shot Mr Walker for the jury to find him guilty.

Philip Strickland SC, acting for the crown, told the court on Friday the case was “one of justification” whereby a police officer that doesn’t act in good faith in the “performance of a function”, such as an arrest, could be completely protected from criminal liability.

19-year-old Indigenous man Kumanjayi Walker was shot dead by police in Yuendumu in Central Australia on Saturday, November 9, 2019.

Chief Justice Susan Kiefel asked whether his essential argument was that the immunity defence was one given collectively to the police rather than to an individual, to which Mr Strickland said “that’s correct.”

Chief Justice Kiefel said the question about whether the shooting had occurred in “good faith” was a matter for the jury.

“Our task is … to see whether those questions are open to the jury,” she said.

Mr Rolfe’s lawyer, Bret Walker SC, argued that such issues could be raised at the trial and it would be an error to delay the proceedings any further.

But Mr Strickland fired back, declaring that due to the circumstances of the case, being the murder of an Indigenous man by a police officer, “an acquittal on an incorrect basis should not be tolerated.”

Constable Rolfe was joined in the Canberra courtroom by his parents and sat silently throughout the proceedings.

The case returns to the NT Supreme Court on Monday.