The Northern Territory Supreme Court has lifted all suppression orders in relation to Zachary Rolfe's murder trial, including some material the judge says may potentially damage the police officer's reputation.
Constable Rolfe was last week found not guilty of murder and two alternative charges over the fatal shooting of Kumanjayi Walker in Yuendumu in November 2019.
Today, a group of media organisations, including the ABC, sought to have more than two dozen suppression orders lifted, including material that was not put before the jury in the five-week trial.
Constable Rolfe's defence barrister David Edwardson QC told the court his client only opposed the lifting of three orders:
- A local court's judgement in an earlier matter
- Text messages sent by Constable Rolfe to friends in the army
- "Tendency" evidence that was excluded from the trial
Mr Edwardson argued the material should not be released because it could prejudice an upcoming coronial inquest, a possible ICAC inquiry, and possible disciplinary action being taken against Constable Rolfe.
He also said the allegations in the material had not been established as fact, and that if it were to be made public, his client may not be able to pursue defamation action.
But Crown prosecutor Philip Strickland SC said another judge in the local court had in fact made findings against Constable Rolfe in a separate matter involving Alice Springs man Malcolm Ryder.
"The finding was that (Constable Rolfe) had deliberately assaulted Mr Ryder," Mr Strickland told the court.
"The finding was that (Constable Rolfe) lied in his evidence in relation to that matter."
In relation to the text messages — which the court is yet to provide to the media — Mr Strickland said they could not be defamatory because Constable Rolfe wrote them himself.
"They are simply communications by [Constable Rolfe] in his own words, which relate to his attitude or his thoughts about the IRT [Immediate Response Team] or police at a particular time."
Mr Edwardson said the text messages were sent by Constable Rolfe to members in the army, and the context related to the army, not to police.
"The bottom line is it's the imputation …. and how the prosecution unsuccessfully argued, or sought to argue, that there was some sinister connotation to what was said."
But Judge John Burns, who presided over the trial, decided to lift the suppression orders.
"Whilst there may be some embarrassment and potentially some damage to the reputation of Mr Rolfe if the material which is the subject of the suppression orders is published, that is of lesser importance, in my view, than ensuring that the public has the means of scrutinising the decisions which have been made by this court," he said.
Judge Burns said it was particularly important to ensure open scrutiny, "particularly so where there are post-trial claims made of interference in the charging process".
The ABC and other media outlets have applied for access to the material that was previously suppressed.
