Overland's conduct must be probed

POLICE cannot cherry-pick conversations from telephone taps in highly sensitive covert probes to benefit themselves or to take the sting out of an inconvenient story in the media.

It beggars belief but it appears this is what Simon Overland, now the Chief Commissioner of Victoria Police, did when he passed on secret intelligence to a colleague from a telephone tap.

Overland wanted to smother a pending story that could have been mildly embarrassing if it had been broadcast on Melbourne Radio 3AW's Rumour File.

Almost as staggering is that Overland's conduct, which was known to the Office of Police Integrity, has not raised an eyebrow in the anti-corruption body.

This is despite the OPI having made scathing findings against others - resulting in their criminal prosecution - over leaks relating to the same covert murder inquiry, Operation Briars.

There was no operational imperative influencing Overland's decision to respond as he did to the intelligence from the tap. There was no threat to anyone's safety. The only risk was to Overland's public image. He chose to put his reputation ahead of the critical objectives of Operation Briars.

Federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland briefed the Australian Federal Police last week to investigate Google for breaches of privacy that occurred when mapping of streets led to wireless networks in homes being accessed.

The AFP is to examine if Google breached the Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Act, which prohibits the access of electronic communications other than for authorised purposes.

Although Overland could not have known the ultimate result of his indiscretion, he or a person in his position should surely have recognised the risks. A covert murder investigation was at stake. Strict protocols were in place to limit operational information being leaked.

Overland as the then deputy commissioner should have known better.

If Google's action justifies referral to the AFP, it is difficult to see how McClelland can overlook Overland's conduct.

The Australian has asked several seasoned criminal lawyers and investigators to review Overland's affidavit, which sets out what he did.

All expressed dismay.

Terry O'Gorman, a veteran criminal defence lawyer, said it was extraordinary. In his view, it requires a priority investigation by an external body with no connection to either Overland or the OPI.

Former National Crime Authority member, Criminal Justice Commission investigations chief and deputy director of public prosecutions Mark Le Grand said yesterday: "How a (then) deputy chief commissioner could imperil a proactive murder investigation to address such trivial personal concerns is truly incomprehensible. You cannot just go out and disseminate information from a telephone tap because you don't want to be embarrassed in the media. Equally significant is that the OPI, the body charged with detecting, investigating and preventing police corruption and serious misconduct in Victoria, has apparently chosen to take no action on this matter."

For good reasons, unauthorised tapping is illegal.

Intelligence from authorised tapping should not be shared with anyone outside the taskforce unless it is for a "permitted purpose". Public relations and spin are not permitted purposes.

If senior investigators with access to the product from telephone taps were permitted to act on it for their own betterment, the system would collapse.

The risk is that the targets would realise their conversations were intercepted, causing the operation to fail after months or years of investigative work. This is precisely what happened in Operation Briars.

The failure of Operation Briars occurred because of indiscretions other than that of Overland; however, he was not penalised for it. Overland through a spokeswoman said late yesterday: "Our comment is that our advice is that the Chief Commissioner has not committed an offence."