By Michael McGowan and Kate McClymont
Body-worn footage from an anti-Israel protest last month shows former Greens candidate Hannah Thomas suffered a serious eye injury when an officer punched her in the face during her arrest, her lawyers and police sources say, prompting demands for charges against her to be dropped.
In accounts which contradict statements made by senior police after Thomas was injured, when officers broke up an anti-Israel protest last month, multiple sources have told this masthead she was punched by an officer during her arrest.
Multiple sources have said former Greens candidate Hannah Thomas suffered a serious eye injury when she was punched by a police officer during a protest in June. Credit: Max Mason-Hubers
The revelation has prompted Thomas’s lawyer, Peter O’Brien, to take the unusual step of demanding the charges against her be dropped, while also confirming that she will launch a civil case, saying she had been “the victim of gratuitous police brutality and excessive use of force”.
“Our firm is now furnished with instructions to proceed with a civil claim for compensation against the state of NSW for the actions of the NSW police officers connected to her apprehension, injury, detention, and prosecution,” O’Brien said.
“Torts likely to be pursued against the state include assault and battery, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, misfeasance in public office, and collateral abuse of process.”
Thomas was injured after police broke up the protest outside SEC Plating on June 27, a business in Belmore demonstrators say supplies plating services for F-35 jets used by the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF). The injury is now subject to a critical incident investigation, and Thomas has been told by doctors to be “prepared for the worst,” including the possibility she will never regain vision in her right eye.
She was one of five people charged after the protest, and the actions of police have been subject to considerable criticism because of doubts over which laws officers relied on to break up the demonstration.
This masthead previously revealed videos and court documents appeared to contradict comments made by police in the days after the protest, and show officers at the scene failing to explain what laws they were relying on to break up the demonstration.
But police have maintained there was no wrongdoing by officers, and court documents prepared by police after Thomas’ arrest blamed “interference” from other protesters for her injury.
On June 30, Assistant Commissioner Brett McFadden told the ABC that police were not investigating the potential for excessive use of force by officers.
McFadden said he had conducted a “preliminary review” of the body-worn video footage along with other senior officers.
There was “no information at this stage before me that indicates any misconduct on behalf of any of my officers,” he said at the time.
But after Thomas’ lawyers viewed body-worn footage from the arrest, O’Brien said he was “satisfied that Ms Thomas was punched in the face by a male police officer, causing extensive and serious injury to her eye”.
“It is not ordinary in a criminal prosecution for a lawyer to comment on the case against their client,” he said.
“However, there are such stark and serious concerns raised by the objective evidence in relation to this prosecution that require immediate public response.
“This is especially so where comments have been made by senior police officials and politicians downplaying the gravity of the incident, apparently justifying police actions and comments that have been detrimental to my client’s position.”
A senior NSW Police officer familiar with the investigation backed up the lawyer’s account, saying Thomas was “punched in the eye.”
Speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing investigation, the senior officer from the south-west metro command questioned McFadden’s account of the arrest, telling this masthead “I’m not sure what body-worn video he was watching. She was punched in the eye.”
The senior officer also described the police investigation as a “shemozzle.”
In a statement, a spokesperson for the NSW Police said it could not respond to questions from this masthead due to the ongoing critical incident investigation.
“As for any critical incident investigation, the circumstances of any serious injury and the conduct of police is incorporated into that investigation, and that investigation is ongoing,” the spokesperson said.
Thomas’s injury was declared a critical incident on June 30, three days after the protest. She was charged with resisting arrest and refusing an order to disperse on the same day.
This masthead subsequently revealed she had been charged using a rarely invoked emergency anti-riot power introduced after the 2005 Cronulla riots to deal with “large-scale public disorder” which required authorisation from senior police to be used.
Police have since said they will drop that charge and replace it with a standard charge for refusing to obey a move-on order.
O’Brien has now written to the NSW Police and Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions saying the charges should be withdrawn.
“The charge of resisting police could never be sustained as the police officers were plainly acting outside of the execution of their duties, in both trying to enforce an unlawful direction and using excessive force, with brutal and life-changing consequences,” he said.
“The charge of failing to comply with a direction will most certainly fail as the direction was plainly and on its face unlawful, and reflected the directing police officer’s complete misunderstanding of the law.”
Start the day with a summary of the day’s most important and interesting stories, analysis and insights. Sign up for our Morning Edition newsletter.