C2014/1198, Transcript of Proceedings [2015] FWCTrans 180 (30 March 2015)

	Home \| Databases \| WorldLII \| Search \| Feedback Fair Work Commission Transcripts

POLICE FEDERATION OF AUSTRALIA
and
VICTORIA POLICE/CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF POLICE
(C2014/1198)
Victoria Police Force Enterprise Agreement 2011

PN1.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, Mr Baldini.

PN2.

MR BALDINI: There is no change to appearances.

PN3.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you.

PN4.

MR BALDINI: If I could deal with a couple of incidental matters first. The witness statement from Inspector Cooper makes a number of references to the activities of two of the previous witnesses, Mr Sven Eagles and Ms Victoria Wilshire. As there has been evidence given as to their activities, they have put in additional statements because they wish to comment on the evidence that has been given about their activities - so we've put in two additional witness statements. We understand it's last minute, but we weren't aware of Inspector Cooper's evidence until yesterday. We propose to call Ms Anitra Dunshea first and then we'll interpose with Mr Eagles and Ms Wilshire, if that's suitable to the commission.

PN5.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, Ms Baker.

PN6.

MS BAKER: I was going to say that we object to the late filing of those two witness statements. I've only just been handed them this morning. They were only referred to in the appendices of our witness statement. If the police association had wanted to call those witnesses - they called them at the original interlocutory hearing - they had plenty of opportunity to call them and I've had no notice or no opportunity to review those statements properly.

PN7.

MR BALDINI: I don't agree with that submission. Inspector Cooper's statement refers to the number of times that each of the personnel has gone out. Those personnel include Ms Wilshire and Mr Eagles. They will be providing evidence that the witness statement provided by Inspector Cooper is incorrect. Also Annexure 2 to Mr Cooper's - and I can take the commission to the exact paragraph, if that's of use. Of course Murphy's law says as soon as you refer to something, you can't find it.

PN8.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Are you wanting to cross‑examine any of these witnesses, Ms Baker?

PN9.

MS BAKER: I'm not sure about these ones, but I'm certainly cross‑examining the other witnesses.

PN10.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Why?

PN11.

MS BAKER: There is some evidence about the nature of their work and what they're doing that hasn't - - -

PN12.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: But isn't it your case that it's a simple matter of statutory construction - what does "required" mean by the employer - rather than the proposition advanced by the Police Federation of Australia that it's an inherent requirement of the job?

PN13.

MS BAKER: That's part of our case, that it's the instructions of Victoria Police that are critical, but another crucial issue is the nature of the jobs that these TIOs are actually performing and whether the jobs that they perform require them to wear a uniform or not.

PN14.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: But are you conceding, therefore, the PFA's view that "required" could mean "required to perform the duties"?

PN15.

MS BAKER: No.

PN16.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Then why would you cross‑examine?

PN17.

MS BAKER: Because we need to show what duties these TIOs are doing and what percentage of the tasks they're undertaking, because that's a key part of our argument: to what extent are they performing duties inside or outside the office and to what extent does it require them - - -

PN18.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: No, I understand that, but doesn't that then require some concession on your part, if that's the argument you're going to run and you can think about it if you wish, that the clause - what clause is it again?

PN19.

MS BAKER: 88.

PN20.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: 88. You see, as I understand the difference between you - 88.1 says, "An employee required to work in civilian clothes." I understand the Police Federation's view is that "required" relates to the work and therefore the commission has jurisdiction to decide whether or not the work being performed requires the wearing of civilian clothing.

PN21.

MS BAKER: Yes.

PN22.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: As I understand Victoria Police's view, "required" is the requirement of the employer, not of the work. Irrespective of the work, required by the employer and, added to that, is the authority given to the Chief Commissioner under the Victoria Police Act to decide under what circumstances uniforms are worn.

PN23.

MS BAKER: That's part of our argument, but we've changed our approach since we've run the last case and we also want to make the point that the work these TIOs undertake - the nature of the work they should be performing - does not require them to wear civilian clothes. It is, therefore, important that I cross‑examine these witnesses.

PN24.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: So, therefore, you would accept that the commission could make a ruling as to whether or not they are, in the performance of their duties, required to wear civilian clothes?

PN25.

MS BAKER: That's correct.

PN26.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Okay. Yes, you can bring forward the material and, Ms Baker, if you need at any stage to seek an adjournment to get instructions on that material, by all means. Given that it has been raised in other documents and this is an attempt for rebuttal of that, then I understand the basis upon which it's put and if you need time given that you've only just seen it, by all means you can have the time.

PN27.

MS BAKER: Thank you, Deputy President.

PN28.

MR BALDINI: We have, in our written material, set out our position.

PN29.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes.

PN30.

MR BALDINI: That position is that the - - -

PN31.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Did I properly apprehend your argument?

PN32.

MR BALDINI: Yes, well, there is one additional aspect to it. That is, "required by the employer" means what does the employer require someone to do in giving them a particular role. When the force or anyone else says the employer requires you to do something - the inspector says, "I require you to be uniform" - there is a higher authority and that is the Chief Commissioner, who says, "This is your job. This is the job I require you to do."

PN33.

So we intend to go to that job and demonstrate that the instructions the TIOs receive from the Chief Commissioner and from the intelligence practitioner authorities - some of the work they do does require plain clothes and it's not true to say that the employer requires them to be in uniform and make that requirement, because that's inconsistent with what the Chief Commissioner has required them to do as TIOs.

PN34.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: No, but the proposition you advance is that the Chief Commissioner has, through delegation, allocated certain duties.

PN35.

MR BALDINI: Yes.

PN36.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: You say it's those duties that would override any instruction to wear a uniform.

PN37.

MR BALDINI: Yes. The most glaring example - and there are certainly others which we'll discuss through the evidence and as put in the witness statements, but the most glaring example is that these members are required to perform surveillance of a public place. You can't perform covert surveillance in uniform. It's almost a nonsense statement to suggest that you can. By covert, we don't mean Secret Squirrel, we'll pretend we're - - -

PN38.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: No.

PN39.

MR BALDINI: But let's go out and analyse the crime scene or inspect a potential crime scene. It can't be done covertly in uniform. That is just one example of the things that simply can't be done in uniform. You'll note from the witness statements that have been lodged, that the witnesses have described that in fair detail. For an inspector to turn around and say, "Well, I'm requiring you to do covert surveillance in uniform," is a requirement that just sort of lapses into - - -

PN40.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: But isn't that then on the head of the inspector? You know, "Go out there and stand on the corner in full uniform, and do covert surveillance." It's just not going to work.

PN41.

MR BALDINI: Yes. It's not going to work. It's, sort of, almost John Cleese style. Their position description and the Victoria Police Intelligence Doctrine which their position description requires them to follow, say that you must do the work properly. Their position description, the doctrine, the instructions that these members are given as to what they must do in doing their job, say you must do these things. For an inspector to turn around and say, "Well, it's on my head. I'm directing you to disobey the Chief Commissioner," our submission is, no, that's not a valid construction.

PN42.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right. There doesn't seem to be any disagreement that the commission has the power to - subject to the jurisdictional argument - decide when a sworn officer does or does not wear a uniform, irrespective of what allowance might attach to it.

PN43.

MR BALDINI: Yes.

PN44.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: The allowance question doesn't arise in this. Only consequentially it arises.

PN45.

MR BALDINI: Yes. In our submission, we have to demonstrate that there is a requirement. We say that requirement comes from the Chief Commissioner's instructions as to what these people will do in their jobs.

PN46.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes.

PN47.

MR BALDINI: That satisfies the requirement provision and, therefore, the allowance follows.

PN48.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I follow. All right. Who are you calling first?

PN49.

MR BALDINI: Ms Anitra Dunshea.

PN50.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Where is that document?

PN51.

MR BALDINI: Sorry, there was one other housekeeping thing, if I may.

PN52.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes.

PN53.

MR BALDINI: That is, the Victoria Police Intelligence Doctrine is a document that gets amended quite regularly, so what we've done is we've printed out a full copy of that which we'd like to hand up. We'll provide a copy - this is the latest version we've printed off the Intranet.

PN54.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right. The parties will let me know if there's anything I should mark as confidential.

PN55.

MR BALDINI: Yes. There will be subsequent material tendered that we will be making that request. We're happy for that VPID document to be marked as confidential.

PN56.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Very well.

PN57.

MS BAKER: Deputy President, can I just clarify one thing? I'm not sure whether I, sort of, articulated myself properly before. With the jurisdictional argument, we'd say there is a jurisdictional argument if we start talking about the Chief Commissioner's power to make decisions about whether people wear civilian clothing or not, but we'd say that the jurisdiction of the commission relates to the extent to which that issue touches on the payment of the civilian clothing allowance.

PN58.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: But the payment is a consequential result of this hearing. This hearing is about whether or not the job requires the wearing of a uniform or not. That's what I'm being asked to rule upon by the PFA. That's why I was interested to know whether you're going to cross‑examine, because I thought it was your argument purely and simply (1) as a matter of statutory construction the agreement can't be read that way and (2) as a matter of jurisdiction it certainly can't be determined by the commission that I could decide, for example, that these officers must wear civilian clothing. The consequence of that is they get an allowance, but that's not the case.

PN59.

MS BAKER: No, well, we would say the commission can't make a rule only to the extent that the allowance comes into it.

PN60.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Why would you cross‑examine? Why would you be interested in the work they do?

PN61.

MS BAKER: Because the work they do determines whether they're required to wear the uniform or civilian clothing and, therefore, the allowance is part of that.

PN62.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, but the only thing I'm asked to rule upon is whether or not the job requirement requires the wearing of civilian clothing. That's the only thing that's put before me. As a consequence of wearing civilian clothing, the agreement provides for an allowance, but I'm not being asked to rule on an allowance because the allowance is there. It applies if you wear civilian clothing.

PN63.

The case the PFA are putting is that the commission should determine that "required" means "required to perform the duties" and therefore it would naturally follow that if they're required to perform the duties in civilian clothing, it's all I need to rule upon. I don't need to go to the next step, because the agreement implements the next step. It says when you're wearing civilian clothing, you'll get an allowance. Would you like 15 minutes to think about that?

PN64.

MS BAKER: Yes, maybe I will.

PN65.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Because it may be that the parties can say you can run your arguments - whilst I put the whole case on together and didn't separate the jurisdiction, there are two elements to your argument, as I apprehend it. One is the statutory construction element and the other is the jurisdiction element. If you say it's nothing to do with me about whether they need to, you don't need to cross‑examine. If you're saying as a secondary position if I find that I have the jurisdiction to determine the wearing or otherwise of police uniform, then I understand why you would cross‑examine; because you will test the evidence of the witnesses as to that matter.

PN66.

The case could be handled in one stage or in two stages, but the first stage could be does the proposition advanced by the PFA - can that be ruled upon? Can I, for example, say, yes, the commission has jurisdiction. We'll hear the argument. The construction point can be that, yes, it's required in the performance of duty. Therefore, let's look at the duties and let's look at it. It's really up to you whether or not you want to press either - out of an abundance of caution cross‑examine on the second point, in case I'm overwhelmingly persuaded by the oratory of the Police Federation. I might give you 10 minutes to have a think about what you want to do and then I'll come back. In the meantime, I'll mark the Police Federation Intelligence Doctrine.

PN67.

MS BAKER: Thank you.

PN68.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I assume that's not a recruitment document. I'll mark that PFA1 and I'll mark it in-confidence - PFA2, I'm sorry, and it's confidential.

PN69.

MR BALDINI: Just for clarity, PFA1 was?

PN70.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Just a moment. I'll tell you what it was. Witness statement of Leading Senior Constable Eagles.

PN71.

MR BALDINI: Okay.

PN72.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: That was at the interlocutory stage.

PN73.

MR BALDINI: I see. This is a continuation of the interlocutory before - - -

PN74.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes.

PN75.

MR BALDINI: The witness statement of Senior Constable Wilshire, was that marked PFA2 in the interlocutory - - -

PN76.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: It doesn't seem to be, but, if I've omitted it, I could mark it.

PN77.

MR BALDINI: Yes, I think that might be the wiser course, because she also provided a witness statement.

PN78.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Did she?

PN79.

MR BALDINI: Yes.

PN80.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: We'll just check that on the adjournment, but, if that's the case, I'll mark that PFA2 and I'll mark the Victoria Police Intelligence Doctrine PFA3.

PN81.

MR BALDINI: Thank you.

EXHIBIT #PFA3 (CONFIDENTIAL) VICTORIA POLICE INTELLIGENCE DOCTRINE

PN82.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: We'll adjourn for 10 minutes.

SHORT ADJOURNMENT [11.44 AM]

RESUMED [12.23 PM]

PN83.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, Ms Baker.

PN84.

MS BAKER: I'll try and explain it. We think if the inquiry that's being made is that - if you're examining the question of whether TIOs are inherently required to wear civilian clothing, that that is the wrong inquiry.

PN85.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes.

PN86.

MS BAKER: If you do it that way, the commission is stepping outside its jurisdiction because you're saying to the Chief Commissioner of Police that the Chief Commissioner cannot make a valid direction. In effect, you would be saying that all TIOs are immune from a direction of the Chief Commissioner of Police.

PN87.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: That's not quite the way I think the federation puts it. The federation puts it that the Chief Commissioner has designated certain roles and, in doing so, it's inherent in that designation that they're required to wear civilian clothing. That's the way it's put, but the tension there is the section that you drew my attention to - section 62, if I remember correctly, of the Police Act.

PN88.

MS BAKER: Yes.

PN89.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Which empowers the police commissioner to determine when and how uniforms are worn - whether that is independent of the duties performed by police or not.

PN90.

MS BAKER: We would say the inquiry that needs to be made here today or that the TPA needs to show, is that TIOs are authorised to wear civilian clothing day to day.

PN91.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: No, well, they're going to run their case as they see fit. That's why I was asking you as to how you were going to respond to that. They may take up your invitation to show that, but I doubt it.

PN92.

MS BAKER: But that's the way we see it and, therefore, we need to be able to cross‑examine their witnesses to show that they're not authorised to wear civilian clothing.

PN93.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right. You only need to ask them one question. You don't need to ask them about their work, do you? You say, "Are you authorised to wear civilian clothing or not?" and the answer will be yes or no. I'm just thinking of the duration of the case, that's all. That's why I asked the original question.

PN94.

MS BAKER: No, because we need to show the nature of the duties that they perform.

PN95.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right. We'll see how we go towards the end. Yes, Mr Baldini.

PN96.

MR BALDINI: If I might start with reference to the exhibits. In the earlier hearing, Ms Victoria Wilshire gave evidence. There was a witness statement which she incorporated into that evidence, but, for reasons we're not sure about, we think we've somehow neglected to get that marked as an exhibit.

PN97.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right.

PN98.

MR BALDINI: What I'd like to do is to hand up the statement that Ms Wilshire incorporated into her evidence in the earlier proceedings.

PN99.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. We'll mark that PFA2.

EXHIBIT #PFA2 WITNESS STATEMENT OF MS WILSHIRE

PN100.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: You want to call some additional evidence?

PN101.

MR BALDINI: Yes, please. If I could call our first witness, Ms Anitra Dunshea.

PN102.

THE ASSOCIATE: State your name and address.

PN103.

MS DUNSHEA: My name is Anitra Helen Dunshea.

PN104.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Your work address will be fine.

PN105.

MS DUNSHEA: It is Burwood Highway at Wantirna South.

<ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA, SWORN [12.29 PM]

<EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MR BALDINI [12.29 PM]

PN106.

MR BALDINI: Ms Dunshea, do you have a copy of the statement you provided for these proceedings?---Yes, I do.

PN107.

Do you acknowledge that that statement is true and correct, and your evidence‑in‑chief in this matter?---Yes, it's correct.

PN108.

Would you like to mark that as an exhibit?

PN109.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes. Just a moment. Whereabouts is it in your folder? I know I've seen it.

PN110.

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: It should be the first witness statement.

PN111.

MR BALDINI: It's the first witness statement immediately after our written submissions.

PN112.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Immediately after the written submissions?

PN113.

MR BALDINI: Yes.

PN114.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: No, immediately after that is the position description, regional instructions - - -

PN115.

MR BALDINI: Yes, they're the attachments to our submissions.

PN116.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: The attachments to your submissions, are they?

PN117.

MR BALDINI: They may be the attachments to Ms Dunshea's witness statement.

PN118.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Just a second. That's correct, I think. I have it.

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA XN MR BALDINI

PN119.

MR BALDINI: Yes.

PN120.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. I'll mark that PFA4.

EXHIBIT #PFA4 WITNESS STATEMENT OF MS DUNSHEA

PN121.

MR BALDINI: Does the commission wish to mark each of the attachments to Ms Dunshea's - - -

PN122.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: No, they're fine.

PN123.

MR BALDINI: So they're all part of the - - -

PN124.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: We'll take them as you've marked them.

PN125.

MR BALDINI: Thank you.

PN126.

That being the evidence‑in‑chief, I don't propose to go through that at all. That statement stands.

PN127.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right. Thank you.

PN128.

MR BALDINI: But I would like to take the witness through the statements provided by the force in relation to this matter.

PN129.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Do you have those with you?---I have - - -

PN130.

Which one are you going to refer to?

PN131.

MR BALDINI: Both the statements from Inspector Cooper and Inspector Clarke.

PN132.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Do you have those with you?---I do have both of those. Thank you.

PN133.

MR BALDINI: Would you like to turn to the statement of Inspector Cooper. In paragraph 3 of Inspector Cooper's statement, he sets out the daily responsibilities for the TIO. Do you agree with that list?---Certainly those are correct. However, he has omitted a number of other responsibilities that TIOs have day to day.

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA XN MR BALDINI

PN134.

What are those?---He has omitted the responsibilities of attending at warrants - search warrants - and at crime scenes, and at high risk community locations for intelligence gathering activities. Those are the activities that require I leave the office to do.

PN135.

Are those all the functions that he has omitted?---He has given an overview of daily responsibilities, but the full - or a more thorough examination of the role of a tactical intelligence operative is contained in documentation and in particular I printed off one this morning before I came. That's the role of the intelligence practitioner. Now, that gives a very thorough overview of the daily responsibilities of a tactical intelligence operative and goes into great depth of those specific things that I've mentioned that have been omitted, like the intelligence collection at warrants and attendance at crime scenes.

PN136.

I'd like to hand up that document the witness has just referred to.

PN137.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes.

PN138.

MR BALDINI: When did you say you'd printed this off---This morning.

PN139.

What did you print it off?---I accessed it on the police Intranet and printed it directly from the police Intranet.

PN140.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: PFA5.

EXHIBIT #PFA5 DOCUMENT RELATING TO TACTICAL INTELLIGENCE OPERATIVES

PN141.

MR BALDINI: Would you like to take the commission through what you say are the functions that are omitted from paragraph 3 of Inspector Cooper's statement but are in this document?---I'll just review what he has included. Okay. Specifically on page 5 of that document, it talks about intelligence collection at warrants. It says in that section that intelligence practitioners should assist on search warrants and the primary role is to search for intelligence based evidence of any association between the entities and the - or any documentation that may link the target to the offence for which the warrant was authorised.

PN142.

Sorry, I've just lost the spot. Can you point out - - -

PN143.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Page 6, last dot point?---Page 6.

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA XN MR BALDINI

PN144.

MR BALDINI: Page 6, sorry. Thank you?---It goes on to detail what the intelligence practitioner should consider at a warrant. It also details, at the bottom of page 6, attendance at crime scenes. Now, the TIO's function of attending at a crime scene is to gather intelligence on the location, the offender and the victim, and that can only be done by attending at a crime scene. It needs to be done at specific times, so, if a crime were to be committed, I may attend the crime scene on a couple of occasions. Once after it was done and then again at the same time and day as the crime was committed in the following week, so as to gather intelligence that was relevant to why that actual crime occurred in that particular area, so that that intelligence can be fed back into our databases so it can be accessed for prevention of further crimes or for, you know, community safety reasons, so - - -

PN145.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Why do you say civilian clothes is necessary to do that? Often at a crime scene you've got uniformed police, as well?---Yes, you do. When I'm attending a crime scene, I'm attending with my work team.

PN146.

Yes?---And my work team are detectives, and they wear plain clothes. Now, if I were to attend a crime scene in a uniform, then often that can be - or it can be and has been in cases a distraction, because people look to a uniformed officer for a particular duty. So if I was there in a uniform, then an attending uniform sergeant or senior sergeant may not recognise me as having a specific task at the crime scene and may then try to direct me to do a - - -

PN147.

Move traffic?---Move traffic. Yes, exactly, to move traffic. That's exactly right. So it can be a distraction and also people who may be at that scene - members of the public - then, you know, ask you, "What's happened here?" You can't just get on with your job, which is to gather intelligence about the crime scene. There's a distraction there.

PN148.

I see. Thank you.

PN149.

MR BALDINI: Are there any other risks in attending warrants in uniform?
---Certainly there are risks in attending warrants in uniform when you're with a plain-clothes unit. Now, the direction in ED2 is that if you leave the office in uniform, you must wear all your operational equipment and wear a high visibility vest. Certainly we use and wear operational equipment when attending a warrant. However, if we were - - -

PN150.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: You've got your safety gear on with plain clothes?
---Not high visibility gear, no.

PN151.

No, but your safety - - -?---But you have all your safety equipment, yes. You have all the - - -

PN152.

Yes. In plain clothes, you can still have your safety equipment with - - -?---Yes.

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA XN MR BALDINI

PN153.

Wearing it?---Wearing it, yes.

PN154.

Yes, I follow?---Yes.

PN155.

MR BALDINI: Is the safety equipment visible when you're in plain clothes?
---Well, not necessarily, because you often have a jacket that, you know, you would wear over the top, but if we were to turn up - or if I was to turn up with plain-clothes detectives at a warrant, then anybody inside the house or the premises that we were executing the warrant would immediately see, "Oh, there's police outside." Now, that gives them the opportunity to perhaps destroy evidence. It gives them the opportunity to abscond from the address, because you're giving them the heads up that the police are out the front and they know, you know, the reason that the police are out the front is because they're wanting to go in. So if I were there in a high visibility vest screaming, "I'm a police officer," out the front, then that certainly would give rise to those things happening.

PN156.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, I follow?---And certainly if there was no-one at the address when we went there, a well-meaning neighbour could just as easily say in passing, "Wow, the police were at your address today," so there are certainly reasons that I would wear plain clothes to a warrant when I'm working in a plain-clothes unit with other people who wear plain clothes.

PN157.

MR BALDINI: What is the problem with the neighbour knowing the police were there?---It's not a problem that the neighbour knows the police are there. It's that they're going to tip off the person whose house we attended, that we were there, and that may not be ideal. Certainly if we were to - I mean, we do drive overs of addresses to check that the person, you know, is living there. When you apply for a warrant, you have to be satisfied that the premises you're executing the warrant on is the right one, so you would do drive-overs of the address to check regos and to check who was there. Now, if I did that drive over in a uniform with a high visibility vest on, you can easily see that inside a car and, you know, the neighbours could just as easily say, "The police were at your - oh, the police were driving up and down the street today."

PN158.

Are there any other aspects of this document that relate to you wearing plain clothes?---Well, on page 9, it talks about assisting investigators in the field, so - well, it's not specifically about wearing plain clothes, but it is talking about assisting the investigation units in the field and those investigation units are plain clothes units.

PN159.

In your earlier evidence in relation to attending a crime scene, is that covered earlier in the document?---Page 6, is attendance at crimes scenes.

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA XN MR BALDINI

PN160.

Are there any other aspects of the document you'd like to draw the commission's attention to?---Only that this document is used in training intelligence practitioners within the organisation and is a document that is written by the centre for intelligence practice, so I would say that this is best practice as far as the centre for intelligence practice is concerned. Certainly it refers to the VPID - or the Victoria Police Intelligence Doctrine - and there are aspects of that which specifically talk about TIO duties for attendance outside the office - which require attendance outside the office.

PN161.

In paragraph 4 of Inspector Cooper's statement, he refers to the duty analyst shifts you do?---Yes.

PN162.

Does a duty analyst shift include you going under a warrant?---Yes, it does. I have the instruction for the Knox Divisional Intelligence Unit. At this point in time, to my knowledge, the Knox Divisional Intelligence Unit is the only unit that has a duty analyst shift and that other areas are not doing it.

PN163.

Can we hand up that document.

PN164.

Is that the document you're referring to?---Yes, it's titled DIU Duty Analyst Requirements and it's dated 13 May 2014.

PN165.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: PFA6.

EXHIBIT #PFA6 DIU DUTY ANALYST REQUIREMENTS DATED 13/05/2014

PN166.

THE WITNESS: So the purpose - if I may.

PN167.

MR BALDINI: Yes, please?---The purpose of the shifts is to provide intelligence support to the entire division. There are a number of duties of the duty analyst and they are numbered within the document, but specifically duty 10 says, "Where appropriate, attend crime scenes with the relevant crime unit," and 11, "Search warrants. Where appropriate, attended search warrants."

PN168.

Again, could you do that in uniform?---Well, if it's a relevant crime unit, then we're talking about a crime investigation unit. Now, there are three within the division and - no, I would say that there are inherent dangers in doing that in uniform, for the reasons that I went into before. You know, it gives offenders the heads up when that's not necessarily what you want to do. In terms of crime scenes, for the same reasons that I gave before, attending in uniform is a distraction.

PN169.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: That's a good reason why I see you have the panel system, because I now know - I know what a 150 is and a 265. Sad, isn't it?

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA XN MR BALDINI

PN170.

MR BALDINI: Could I take you to paragraph 10 and the survey that was done in 2013?---Yes.

PN171.

You participated in that survey?---I did.

PN172.

I'd like to hand up the email that was sent.

PN173.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: PFA7.

EXHIBIT #PFA7 SURVEY EMAIL

PN174.

MR BALDINI: What was your understanding of what was being asked for in this survey?---Prior to receiving this email, I had - I think at that point in time that was - 2013, yes. I had been working within the ED2 for 14 months and I'd come from the crime department, and I've worked in a number of areas in the crime department, but specifically I spent most of my time in the sexual crime squad. When I went to ED2, I was working in the sex offence and child abuse investigation team environment, which is a plain clothes environment. Now, I had expressed concern to the manager of the DIU that my skills were being under‑utilised. My understanding was the purpose of this survey was so that that could be addressed by the manager of the DIU, because he had a responsibility under the VPID to ensure that the VPID is applied correctly within the divisions and that we follow that doctrine, and that investigative units support or - yes, support the doctrine. So my understanding was that the purpose of the survey was so that those deficiencies could be addressed.

PN175.

Could I refer you to paragraph 15, which talks of - Inspector Cooper refers to you wearing a uniform during that period?---Mm-hm.

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA XN MR BALDINI

PN176.

I believe you cover that in your statement. Could you just take the commission to your evidence in relation to the time that you wore a uniform?---Yes, I wore a uniform for a very short period. It was toward the end of 2013 or the beginning of 2014. I'm not exactly sure of the date. Now, I was still working in the sexual offence and child abuse investigation team and I was working with, I think, around 25 detectives. During that time that I did wear the uniform, I spent most of my time explaining to them why I was in uniform, but one of the things that is very, very difficult to explain is the way that it made me feel. I was no longer part of that team. I was not - I just felt marginalised in my workplace. I felt devalued. I just - it's really, really difficult to sort of - to quantify that emotion, but it really had a profound effect on how I felt going to work each day, because here I was working in this - with this team of detectives and sitting there with them and wearing a uniform, explaining to everyone who came into the office why I was wearing a uniform and nobody else was. It certainly was - made it quite difficult for me just to go out at a moment's notice. There was no, sort of, "Okay, we're going" - you know, "We're going to do" such and such, "Are you going to come along?" because they were dealing with, in a lot of cases, victims of sexual assault and certainly victims of sexual assault feel quite vulnerable, and if someone turns up in uniform, it sort of - it can be quite confronting for them. You know, that's why members of the SOCAIT wear plain clothes. During that time, you know, the members of my unit said to me - they all said to me, "Why do you have to wear that? You are one of our team. Why do you have to wear a uniform? We want you to be part of our team. We want you to be involved in what our team does and we want you to wear plain clothes."

PN177.

Were you tasked to go out on any warrants in the period you were in uniform?"
---No.

PN178.

Were you ever tasked to go out to any crime scenes when you were in uniform?
---No.

PN179.

Were you tasked to interview any members of the public whilst you were in uniform? Offenders - - -?---No. During that time - - -

PN180.

No victims?---During that time, I actually needed to interview a victim. Not because she was giving a statement, because that's not my role, but she was not prepared to make a statement, so she - but she was prepared to provide intelligence. Now, she's a vulnerable young girl and a girl who also had, through her upbringing and her situation, an engrained hatred of police, so when I was able to get a meeting with her, it was specifically said to me, "Don't wear your uniform, because she won't talk to you if you're in your uniform," so I got changed to do that.

PN181.

Even though the direction was to wear a uniform, you had to get changed?---Well, I had to. She wouldn't have talked to me. She wouldn't have given me that intelligence and it was relevant to a sexual predator who was trying to entice young girls into a vehicle.

PN182.

After a while, you started wearing plain clothes again?---Yes, I did.

PN183.

Did you discuss that with the senior sergeant of your unit?---I discussed it with the manager of the DIU. Certainly I discussed the issue of wearing plain clothes with the senior sergeant, but when I went back to wearing the plain clothes, I discussed it with the manager of the DIU. It was my observation that I was the only person in a plain clothes unit in a division that was wearing a uniform at that time, so, you know, I was allowed to go back into plain clothes.

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA XN MR BALDINI

PN184.

You were allowed by the manager of the DIU?---Well, he didn't dispute what I was saying - - -

PN185.

He agreed with you?--- - - - and I started wearing plain clothes again.

PN186.

And the senior sergeant of the SOCAIT agreed with you, as well?---The senior sergeants in the plain clothes units are quite - they're quite vocal that they want their TIOs to be part of the team and to wear plain clothes.

PN187.

Do you address that issue in your statement?---Yes, I do.

PN188.

Can you take the commission to the paragraph? It's already in evidence, but by way of emphasis?---Paragraph 7.

PN189.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Is that a convenient time, Mr Baldini?

PN190.

MR BALDINI: Yes.

PN191.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Very well. We'll adjourn until 2 o'clock. You remain on your oath. The matter is adjourned.

<THE WITNESS WITHDREW [12.59 PM]

LUNCHEON ADJOURNMENT [12.59 PM]

RESUMED [2.08 PM]

PN192.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, Mr Baldini?

PN193.

MR BALDINI: Before we resume the examination-in-chief, one of our witnesses has had to leave with a child-care situation. If the Commission is minded to have a second hearing day we would seek to ‑ ‑ ‑

PN194.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, I think we need to, don’t we, in light of the number of witnesses?

PN195.

MR BALDINI: Yes, I was suspecting that it is going to go that way.

PN196.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes. I’ll have my acting associate try and find a date and we’ll let you know. It might be next week, it might be something - hopefully something’s dropped out.

PN197.

MR BALDINI: Thank you. We’re in the evidence of Ms Dunshea.

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA XN MR BALDINI

PN198.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes. You remain on your oath, thank you.

<ANITA ELLEN DUNSHEA, ON FORMER OATH [2.08 PM]

<EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MR BALDINI, CONTINUING [2.08 PM]

PN199.

MR BALDINI: Ms Dunshea, can you refer to paragraph 20 of Inspector Cooper’s statement?‑‑‑Yes.

He refers in that to the number of times that TIs have left their office. How many times would you have left your office in the last six months?‑‑‑In the last six months I would have left the office between 15 and 20 times, but I do need to say that between July and October I had a back injury, a disc injury, and I was on sick leave for much of that period and then when I returned to work I was not able to wear the operational equipment, the belt, and that was up until early October. In addition to that, during that period of six months, I had five weeks’ leave as well. I had two weeks in November and three weeks in December/January.

PN200.

So just to clarify your evidence of that six months, you were only at the office approximately two months?‑‑‑Yes, that’s correct.

PN201.

In that time you went out how many times?‑‑‑Between 15 and 20 times.

PN202.

Do you agree with the inspector’s assertion that on no more than four of these occasions would have necessitated the wearing of plain clothes?‑‑‑No, I don’t agree.

PN203.

Why not?‑‑‑The - he says, “Of these 10 times, no more than four occasions.” Well, no. I went to high risk community locations on a number of those occasions and my experience is that when you attend a high risk community location you want an accurate - you want to make an accurate assessment of what’s going on at that location. So if I go in plain clothes I can see what the - what’s going on around the public transport hub, which is an area of concern. Now, I know, from experience, when I’ve walked over there and there’s been uniform members behind me, walking in the same direction, that those people just leave that location. So in order to assess a high risk community location you need to do it in plain clothes. If you’re there in uniform you’re not getting an accurate assessment of what’s going on because people just leave. People behave differently when they’re in the presence of a uniformed officer. Additionally, I went to warrants and to debrief a source of intelligence. Now, if I’d gone to debrief that source of intelligence in uniform I doubt very much he would have spoken to us. The reason for that is that he had tried to give - previously tried to give information to a - police officers, at a police station, and his complaint was that the information that he was providing wasn’t being taken seriously. So he specifically asked that somebody come to see him because he had information that he wanted to provide police, or “investigators” was his words.

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA XN MR BALDINI

PN204.

So he specifically asked for you to come in plain clothes, do I understand you correctly?‑‑‑No, he didn’t ask for us to be in plain clothes, but I doubt that he would have been - I doubt he would have been satisfied because he had not got satisfaction from dealing with uniformed police at the police station and he wanted to provide information and he specifically asked for, “I want - I want the detectives in charge of the case to come.” Now, I had ‑ ‑ ‑

PN205.

Watching too much American television?‑‑‑It’s actually a long-term missing person’s case, which incidentally or coincidentally I took the original reports for, so I knew - very, very good knowledge of the case and my - my boss, Senior Sergeant Neil White, asked me to go.

PN206.

Thank you. Do you agree with the statement that no intelligence report was submitted from any of the 15 to 20 times that you went out?‑‑‑No, that’s just not true. I’ve submitted intelligence reports, or information reports on ‑ ‑ ‑

PN207.

So what’s the difference between an intelligence report and information report?‑‑‑Well, they’re - they’re the same thing it’s just that some people - they are actually information reports but some people refer to them, mistakenly, as intelligence reports.

PN208.

So there’s no formal intelligence report document that you failed to submit?‑‑‑No. No, I submitted an information report.

PN209.

Do you agree with the statement at the end of paragraph 20:

There is no operational reason for this shift.

Sorry, for the context?‑‑‑The shift in people going out?

PN210.

The majority of their attendances in the field was November 14, 15, January 15, there is no operational reason for this shift.

?‑‑‑Well, all that I can say is that that’s when I was in the workplace so I was going out, so that’s why there was an increase, in - in respect of my going out. In speaking to another TIO, in regard to that part of Inspector Cooper’s statement, Leading Senior Constable Di Kelly is the TIO in the SOCAIT, or sex offence and child abuse investigation team. Now, they’ve recently taken over responsibility of the registered sex offenders from crime investigation units throughout the division. They previously were just looking after the RSOs, or registered sex offenders for Knox, but additionally now they’re looking after them for Yarra Ranges and for Maroondah Police Service areas. Now, that’s an additional workload and that’s - she told me that’s created more - more occasions where she’s required to go out with detectives to visit registered sex offenders in their - in their homes.

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA XN MR BALDINI

PN211.

Is there an operational reason for visiting sex offenders in their homes?‑‑‑Well, she would be gathering intelligence regarding their situations.

PN212.

Could that be done in uniform?‑‑‑Well, the issue with doing it in uniform is that there’s the potential to identify a registered sex offender. Now, there’s legislation that says that, you know, that police - you can’t do something to identify someone as a registered sex offender, so there is that - there is that risk there and members of that particular unit, or that particular team within the unit, that manage the registered sex offenders wear plain clothes for that reason.

PN213.

That’s actually a legislative requirement?‑‑‑Well, it’s a legislative requirement that you don’t identify a registered sex offender and where they live.

PN214.

Thank you. If we could move on to page 21 and Inspector Cooper’s made a number of comments, in relation to the statements provided by yourself as a witness?‑‑‑Mm hm.

PN215.

If we could just go through them in order; 21(a), do you agree with the statement that the position description does not mean deployed in the field?‑‑‑Absolutely not. All the training that I have had as an intelligence - as a TIO has specifically said, and that document that I referred to earlier, says TIOs should attend search warrants, TOIs should visit crime scenes. TIOs - the VPID requires that TIOs attend at high risk community locations to make assessment of those locations.

PN216.

Could you just clarify, for the Commission, what document you’re referring to?‑‑‑I’m referring to ‑ ‑ ‑

PN217.

By its PFA number?‑‑‑I’m referring to the role of the intelligence practitioner and I’m referring to one of my attachments to my statement, which is my position description and also another attachment - there’s an attachment of the VPID, it’s chapter 2, which is attached to my statement, and chapter 9 also.

PN218.

Yes. What about (b), “The work of TIs is reasonably predictable,” do you agree with that?‑‑‑No, it’s not, it’s not predictable.

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA XN MR BALDINI

PN219.

Why not?‑‑‑Well, it’s not predictable because we’re - in a crime investigation unit you are - whilst there is proactive work much of it is reactive and you don’t know when you’re going to come to work and find that a crime’s occurred over night. A couple of weeks ago I got to work and I was looking at what had occurred the night before and there had been 27 thefts from cars overnight. Now, that was reported, anecdotally, the intelligence that we - that we subsequently gathered, there was 40. The - the person’s responsible actually said, “Well, we did about 40 that night.” Now, they were all within a specified area and so immediately I looked, “All right, well where are we going to get source intelligence to try and identify who the offenders are?” I made calls, I ascertained that there was CCTV that would be available and so we went out and got it. I mean I had no warning of that. I had no warning that I would get to work and there would be 40 thefts from cars and we’d be, you know, trying to work out who was doing it.

PN220.

Could you have gone out in uniform?‑‑‑Well, again if I’d - if I had gone out in uniform then - we didn’t know who we were - who we were dealing with. Were we dealing with local kids? In which case we were going to areas where these crimes had been committed, were the kids local to the areas? If they’d seen the police snooping around? You know, potentially they could have got rid of the items that they’d stolen from the vehicles. So I just don’t think it was - you know, it just doesn’t go hand in hand with that type of investigation and intelligence gathering, to wear a uniform.

PN221.

(d):

There is a clear case law in respect of intelligence officers that cannot seize items for intelligence purposes.

Are you familiar with that case law?‑‑‑I am very familiar with the case law. In 2008 I was performing duties with the Legal Services Office and it was something that Legal Services had put to the Victorian Government Solicitor to seek opinion on, on that very subject. So I am familiar with that and I think that most TIOs are well aware that you can’t gather intelligence outside the scope of the warrant. Now, that’s not to say that there is not - that evidence, within the scope of the warrant, is not intelligence, because it is. It’s also not to say that if you stumble across other evidence, during the execution of a search warrant, that you can’t - or intelligence that establishes an offence you can’t seize that at the time. So you might go, for instance, to a warrant that is a drug warrant, for argument’s sake, and while you’re there, you might ascertain that there’s child pornography at the premises. There’s nothing to stop you seizing that and, as long as correct channels are used and it’s presented - you know, it’s put before the court, there’s nothing to stop you taking other items within the - that are within the - outside the scope of the warrant, as long as the correct procedures are adhered to.

PN222.

So you are allowed to seize items, for intelligence purposes, that are in the scope of the warrant, are you?‑‑‑Absolutely you are. Absolutely. If you I mean it always has to be in connection with the crime, but there will often be documents that are - in connection with that crime, that are valuable intelligence. Evidence can be intelligence. So that - as an intelligence practitioner, that’s what you’re looking for. That’s your specialty. You’re going there and you’re going - you’re looking - assisting in the search, within the terms of the - or the - of the warrant that’s been issues and you’re gathering information pertaining to that offence.

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA XN MR BALDINI

PN223.

(e):

A number of search warrants were executed by the SOCAIT, none of these were covert.

Do you agree that that’s the case?‑‑‑(e)? Well, that’s really not surprising that none were covert because SOCAIT and crime investigation units in police service areas don’t execute covert warrants. Specialist services units execute covert warrants.

PN224.

What’s a “covert warrant”?‑‑‑Well, a covert - an example of a covert warrant would be the technical surveillance unit going in and putting a listening device in. Now, we don’t do that so I’m really - I disagree - as I say, it’s not surprising that none of the search warrants executed by SOCAIT were covert.

PN225.

So what would be the implication of SOCAIT executing a search warrant in uniform?‑‑‑Well, if the SOCAIT were to execute a search warrant in uniform, then potentially that could give rise to identifying the victim. I mean warrants are executed at a variety of locations, but if the crime happened in the victim’s home and you were going there and executing a search warrant in uniform, then that has the potential to identify that person as a victim of a sexual assault. Now, that’s legislated that you’re not to identify the victim of a sexual assault.

PN226.

Inspector Cooper quotes the manual and says:

Except were undertaking static physical surveillance, physical surveillance must only be performed by employees who have completed the appropriate training course.

Do you agree with that?‑‑‑That is section (f), is that right? No, (e).

PN227.

(e)?‑‑‑(e).

PN228.

It refers to ‑ ‑ ‑?‑‑‑Yes, the Victoria Police Manual. Well, it’s not suggested that we do anything more than static surveillance. Again, there are specialist units that do mobile physical surveillance and they’re the - it fails me, we call them “the dogs” but it fails me, the state surveillance unit. The state surveillance unit ‑ ‑ ‑

PN229.

An affection nick-name, no doubt?‑‑‑The state surveillance unit do that specialist kind of surveillance and we’re not suggesting that we do that specialist kind of surveillance. But doing a drive over an address is static surveillance. We’re not getting out - we’re not chasing a car and we’re not getting out, in pairs, and chasing a target. We are doing drive overs, in a covert fashion, in order to gather intelligence, sometimes pre-warrant execution, or sometimes just to gather the intelligence to know that we’ve got the right place.

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA XN MR BALDINI

PN230.

So, again, could you do that in uniform?‑‑‑Well, no, because then we would be burnt.

PN231.

“Burnt” as in?‑‑‑Burnt as in we would be identified as police snooping around and we wouldn’t be covert. Specially it says, in my position description, point 7.

Provide assistance, during search, seize and arrest activities, including surveillance and covert operations for intelligence purposes, as appropriate.

Now, I’m not suggesting that we do covert, as in the technical surveillance unit, or the state surveillance unit, but we’re doing things in a way that’s hidden or concealed from identifying us as police officers in order to get a result.

PN232.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: But what Victoria point is, as I understand it, may be taken by Ms Baker’s questions, I don’t know, is that if the relevant command structure wants you to do something like that, where you’re not to be identified, they will direct you to wear civilian clothing, but that doesn’t translate in being required to wear civilian clothing all the time. That’s as I understand what they’re putting and that’s why I think they ask you - or they’ve suggested you bring your civilian clothing in so that if something occurs you can be directed to go out of uniform into civilian clothing?‑‑‑So to get changed ‑ ‑ ‑

PN233.

Yes?‑‑‑ ‑ ‑ ‑ and to keep - to maintain a civilian wardrobe in your locker?

PN234.

That’s as I understood ‑ ‑ ‑?‑‑‑So then I would still need to - the clothes that I wear now, I would still need to maintain those in a locker, but I wouldn’t be available to go out at a moment’s notice. Whilst ‑ ‑ ‑

PN235.

I hesitate to ask whether it would take you that long?‑‑‑When - when the detectives decide to go out, they decide to go out.

PN236.

Yes?‑‑‑They get up and they say, “Right, let’s go and ‑ ‑ ‑

PN237.

Walk to the door?‑‑‑“Let’s go and do a drive over at this address.” It happens like that.

PN238.

I follow?‑‑‑It doesn’t happen like, “Hang on, Anita’s just got to go and get changed, can you wait while I do that?” Or, if I’m not maintaining a civilian clothing outfit in my locker upstairs, then I have to go home. They’re not going to wait for me to go home and get changed.

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA XN MR BALDINI

PN239.

Yes, I follow?‑‑‑So if I - for argument’s sake, if I go to the gym on the way to work, well, I’ll have my gym clothes on and then I’ll go to work and get changed into my uniform, and then what am I going to wear? You know, it just doesn’t make business sense. And my boss has said, “I want you to be wearing-” he’s the manager in charge of the crime investigation unit and he said, “I want you to be in plain clothes and I want you to be in plain clothes so that you can do these things when you’re required to do them. It’s a waste of your time and it’s a waste of my member’s time if you have to go and get changed to do the job that I want you to do.”

PN240.

Thank you.

PN241.

MR BALDINI: Inspector Cooper refers to search warrants undertaken by SOCAIT unit that involve plain clothes members, as well as support from uniform members from the DIU. Are you aware of that occurring?‑‑‑I am aware of two - two occasions where that occurred, and once it was the officer in charge of the DIU, Sergeant Darren Keenos(?), attended a warrant and he attended in uniform. The other occasion was Leading Senior Constable Creek, because I asked him because I was not going to be available. I think I had leave or something, and I asked him whether he would attend warrants and he said, “Yes,” and he wore plain clothes. So they’re the only two occasions that I know that the DIU was present at the execution of a warrant. I’m not sure the nature of the warrant that either of them attended so - yes, I really don’t know whether Sergeant Keenos attended a warrant and it was to seize computer equipment. It could have been quite simple, seizing computer equipment for a child pornography.

PN242.

(g), Inspector Cooper says he has spoken to over 40 detectives and none of them refused to work with a TIO on the basis that they were in uniform. You were in uniform for a while, what’s your experience?‑‑‑Well, they ‑ ‑ ‑

PN243.

I think you’ve already covered this, to some extent, in your previous answers so just a brief response?‑‑‑Well, certainly I wasn’t asked to accompany them when I was sitting there wearing a uniform and what I can say, in my current - see, I’ve changed workplaces, your Honour, and I was with the SOCAIT and now I’m with the crime investigation unit. So it’s - they’re - they’re - they’re different - they’re different areas. The crime investigation unit is much more dynamic. So what I can say is that again those - whilst they’re not going to - they’re not going to say, “I am not going to work with you because you are wearing a uniform” they just overlook you, will overlook me. They won’t wait for me to get changed. They will just go out without me and then what happens is that slowly I become isolated from the work that they’re doing. Now, in order to analyse intelligence surrounding a crime investigation you must be involved. That’s - again, part of my position description, you need to be -

Effectively participate in team activities and engage in the collection, evaluation, collation analysis and control dissemination of intelligence in relation to Victoria Police operational objectives.

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA XN MR BALDINI

PN244.

Now, if I’m not ready to go out with them, I’m going to be excluded from that activity. I’m going to not have full knowledge of the jobs that I’m supposed to be working on with them and if I don’t have full knowledge of the jobs I’m not going to be able to effectively provide them an intelligence service.

PN245.

(h) says:

The attendance of uniform members will not compromise the execution of a warrant.

Again, do you agree with that or disagree with that?‑‑‑Well, I disagree, and that’s something that we’ve talked about earlier today is that the attendance of a uniform member at a warrant can compromise it. It can lead to destruction of evidence. It can lead to the target absconding from the address.

PN246.

There is no difference in the role of a TI in uniform, most of their work is performed in the office.

We’ve already discussed the locker. Are detectives - would you say most of the detective’s work is performed in the office? Would you say that’s true, or not?‑‑‑Yes, a large proportion of detective’s work is performed in the office. They’re preparing briefs of evidence. They’re making inquiries, they’re doing their paperwork. So, yes, you know, there’s quite a proportion of work that’s done within the office. But we - they still need to go out and I still need to go out and I need to go out with them.

PN247.

Under (j) Inspector Cooper says, “There is no covert work performed by the TIOs.” Do you agree with that?‑‑‑No, I don’t. Again, you know, if you’re talking about covert work as done by specialist units, then no, TIOs don’t do that, but we do do things that necessitate that we are concealed or hidden or de-identified as a member of the police force.

PN248.

If we move on to clause 22?‑‑‑Mm hm.

PN249.

I won’t take a lot of time, but can you identify, of the units in clause 22, which of the units are plain clothes units and which units are uniform units?‑‑‑Well, the sex offence and child abuse investigation team is a plain clothes unit. The crime investigation units are all plain clothes unit and the divisional tasking unit is a plain clothes unit. The highway patrol, obviously, is not - is a uniform unit and that’s because highway patrol is high visibility work. Now, there is no TIO assigned to the highway patrol in ED2. There is someone working in the DIU who does some of their work for them, but there is no actual TIO. Then the family violence unit is a proactive unit and it’s a uniformed unit and there is a part-time TIO who works in that unit.

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA XN MR BALDINI

PN250.

Thank you. Could I direct you to the evidence of Inspector Peter Clark, his statement? In paragraph 6 he refers to a decision R v Slaveski, is that the decision that you referred earlier, or is that a different decision?‑‑‑No, I was referring to legal opinion by the Victorian Government Solicitor’s office. This decision was 2010 and is - yes, it talks about warrants - it talks about a decision at where the collection of evidence must fall within the scope of the warrant.

PN251.

Yes. Did the decision also talk about information that you stumbled across in your ‑ ‑ ‑?‑‑‑well, I haven’t read the full - it’s a very lengthy document, your Honour, and I haven’t ‑ ‑ ‑

PN252.

If you can’t give evidence, that’s fine?‑‑‑ ‑ ‑ ‑ read the full decision, but what I can say is that that decision is highlighted in the - this document, The Role of the Intelligence Practitioner, when it talks about - as a result of that decision there’s - the Victoria Police Manual, 105(2), on page 5 of this document, talks about those involved in search warrant must be in direct relation to the issue of the warrant, not for an unrelated opportunistic purpose, such as general information gathering. But we’ve talked about that, we know we’re not there for general information gathering. But it doesn’t preclude - where another offence is discovered at the time of executing a warrant, it doesn’t preclude us from gathering that information as well.

PN253.

Thank you. Just a couple more questions. Are you aware of what members in other divisions, other regions - that is TIO members, are they in plain clothes?‑‑‑In other - yes, absolutely.

PN254.

Do they receive a plain clothes allowance?‑‑‑Yes, the do. The Melbourne intelligence unit has some - for their TIOs they have a direction, I think. I might even have something from the intranet.

PN255.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: It’s only when they’re attached to CIs, is it?‑‑‑It’s their TIOs. All their TIOs are in plain clothes. They have two distinct streams, they have a divisional intelligence analysts and then they have their TIOs. All their TIOs are in plain clothes. I can’t comment on what the individuals within that stream are actually doing, day-to-day, but they are all in plain clothes. I don’t know of any TIO in any plain clothes environment that wears uniform. You know, even the TIO at the special operations group is in plain clothes. They’re - I don’t know of any - any other area in the police force that has TIOs working in plain clothes environments wearing a uniform.

PN256.

MR BALDINI: Excuse me a moment?

PN257.

Just in relation to the activities you perform, just to clarify it, would you say that you interview suspects?‑‑‑Yes.

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA XN MR BALDINI

PN258.

Would you say that you give evidence in court?‑‑‑Yes.

PN259.

Would you say that you conduct surveillance?‑‑‑Yes.

PN260.

Would you execute warrants?‑‑‑Yes.

PN261.

Would you investigate reported crimes; suspected criminal activity?‑‑‑Yes.

PN262.

Thank you, I’ve got no further questions.

PN263.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you. Ms Baker?

<CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS BAKER [2.46 PM]

PN264.

MS BAKER: Leading senior constable, there is a regional instruction that was issued by AC Dunn, in March 2014, indicating that TIOs were to wear full uniform on a daily basis. You would surely accept, wouldn’t you, that you are obliged to comply with an instruction like that?‑‑‑Well, my understanding was at the time it was issued that that - that that instruction was subject to these hearings.

PN265.

I don’t think these hearings were on foot at that time. I suppose the question is, if you saw an instruction like that do you agree that you have to comply with an instruction that comes out from Victoria Police Command?‑‑‑Well, most certainly. This was in dispute so - I’m not sure - certainly at the time that that instruction came out this was in dispute that the wearing of plain clothes was a - something that was being addressed by the Police Association, on our behalf, in terms of that instruction. So, yes.

PN266.

If it wasn’t in dispute would you comply with an instruction like that?‑‑‑Well, the instruction also said that where there were local management arrangements then we could wear plain clothes. Now, I - my boss had said, “I want you to wear plain clothes” then if - that’s a local arrangement. So if I could just get a copy of that instruction, I think I’ve got it here.

PN267.

It says:

All tactical or intelligence officers are required to wear full uniform whilst undertaking their duties. Tactical intelligence officers within the eastern region are not eligible to receive the plain clothes allowance. Plain clothes can only be claimed where local or temporary arrangements for wearing of the plain clothes are established for particular work units or for operations or events where there is a specific business need.

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA XXN MS BAKER

PN268.

So I guess I’m just saying ‑ ‑ ‑

PN269.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: That’s a quote, isn’t it?

PN270.

MS BAKER: Yes, that’s a direct quote.

PN271.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Unfortunately, given that we have nobody present to see you say that, I don’t want them confusing that with a submission compared to a quote. It’s for transcript purposes where we’re going to have to slightly modify our conduct so the person in the remote part of this building can understand the way in which things are put.

PN272.

MS BAKER: Okay. Do you want me to hand it up?

PN273.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: No, that’s all right, unless the witness wants to see it.

PN274.

MS BAKER: Would you like to see the document?‑‑‑Well, I have seen the document. It has been shown to me. Now ‑ ‑ ‑

PN275.

I mean it does provide the exception there, you know, if there are local - you know, if there are specific operations or purposes you can go out - you can have arrangements for civilian clothing. So I guess what I’m just saying is normally would you comply with a direction that came through from command?‑‑‑Normally I would comply with a direction that came in through command, yes I would. However, I think we ‑ ‑ ‑

PN276.

MR BALDINI: Perhaps the witness might be assisted if we handed her a copy of the document.

PN277.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thanks, Mr Baldini.

PN278.

MS BAKER: I’ve just handed that up?‑‑‑So that was issued at the same time that Inspector Cooper became aware that TIOs weren’t wearing uniform because we’d been advised - or he says, in his statement, “Because they’ve been advised by the Police Association not to do so.” So that regional - sorry - yes, regional instruction came out at a time when the plain clothes issue was in dispute. Yes.

PN279.

Okay, I don’t want to take that any further. Now, looking at your statement, is it a fair summary, overall, of what you’re saying is that there are a number of reasons why TIOs should work on a daily basis and then you’re providing an explanation of why that is so, that’s a true representation of your statement?‑‑‑Sorry.

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA XXN MS BAKER

PN280.

MR BALDINI: I’m sorry, I didn’t follow that.

PN281.

THE WITNESS: I didn’t follow that.

PN282.

MS BAKER: Well, is it true to say that your statement represents - what you’re saying is there are a number of reasons why TIOs should wear civilian clothing and why they need to, that’s what you’re putting forward in your written statement?‑‑‑Yes. Yes, there are a number of reasons. Yes.

PN283.

Are you convinced that these views that you’ve put forward, these reasons you’ve put forward, are correct?‑‑‑Yes.

PN284.

You’d have to say that it’s equally true that these views are not shared by Victoria Police command?‑‑‑I would say that it was equally true that they weren’t shared by Inspector Cooper. I don’t - I - I can categorically say that the - in the police, within ED2, there are two streams. Now, the tasking and coordination is Inspector Cooper and he looks after our stream, the TIOs. There’s also the investigation and response manager, who is actually responsible for all the crime investigation units. So that’s Inspector Terry Cain. Now, I can say to you that last week I most recently had a conversation with Inspector Cain, in which he said to me, and it’s not the first time he said it, he said, “If it was up to me, all you TIOs and CIs would be wearing plain clothes.” So, no, it’s not shared by the rest of command.

PN285.

But when I say “command” I mean the senior management at Victoria Police, so the ACs and that level?‑‑‑Well, I can’t agree with that, otherwise every TIO in the state would be wearing uniform, but they’re not, they’re wearing plain clothes. So I can’t agree that the senior command, force command, agrees with that.

PN286.

So the TIOs who are in the major collision investigation unit, that includes detectives and TIOs, isn’t correct that they are in uniform?‑‑‑I don’t know. I have - I have not been to that workplace so I can’t comment on what they wear day-to-day. I can say that the major collision investigation unit is again, like the highway patrol, a high visibility area of the police force and I believe they all wear uniform there, but I don’t know, I haven’t been there to say. But the times that I’ve been, in the days when I was working a van, when they’ve attended scenes, they’ve been in uniform, so that’s all members of the major collision investigation unit.

PN287.

You state, in paragraph 7 of your statement, that there were 62 planned and unplanned warrants within the division during 2014?‑‑‑Yes.

PN288.

How many of the planned warrants were you involved in, in 2014?‑‑‑Well ‑ ‑ ‑

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA XXN MS BAKER

PN289.

MR BALDINI: Sorry, I’m not sure that that’s what the statement says, “within the division”?

PN290.

MS BAKER: In the unit.

PN291.

MR BALDINI: In the unit, thank you.

PN292.

MS BAKER: It might say “in the unit”. No, it says, “within the division.” Paragraph 7, “The work unit executed 62 planned and unplanned warrants within the division during 2014.”?‑‑‑Yes, that’s my work unit, so that’s the Knox crime investigation unit.

PN293.

So you’re not talking about the division, you’re just talking about the unit?‑‑‑No, what I’m - what I’m saying is that the Knox crime investigation unit executed 62 warrants within ED2. Now, they also executed warrants outside ED2, but they were not - those numbers are not available to me.

PN294.

So how many were you - how many of the planned warrants were you personally involved in?‑‑‑Well, I wasn’t working for the Knox crime investigation unit for that period of time. I was only there - available to do planned or unplanned warrants for the very, very last part of the year and I - they were unplanned warrants and I attended two unplanned warrants with them. But - yes. That was by - by way of example, if I can just put that paragraph into context, what I’m saying here is that the boss of the unit has said to me, “I want you to wear plain clothes, I want you to go out with the detectives, I want you to engage in intelligence gathering activities, I want you attend warrants, both planned and unplanned warrants.” Now, by way of example I’m saying that the crime investigation unit that I now work for, over a period of 12 months, does that amount of warrants. So I expect that in 2015 I’ll be attending a number of warrants. Now, I can’t - they will be both planned and unplanned and I can’t say that I’m going to attend every one because it’s not reasonable for me to do so, I can’t attend every one. Also, you know, I’m not going to attend a warrant if they execute a warrant on a bank. I mean there’s no reason for me to go to, you know, to collect some paperwork from a bank, so I’m not going to attend every one. But that was just by way of example, because the boss has said to me, “I want you to go to as many” so I’m just putting in that - into context that they do a lot of warrants, so I potentially, in 2015, will be accompanying those - on a proportion of those warrants, both planned and unplanned.

PN295.

But you attended two during 2014?‑‑‑Yes, I attended two because I didn’t go to that unit until September and for - until early October I was not able to attend any because I was not able to be operational, I had a back injury, and I was on five weeks’ leave. So that’s why I attended two in that time.

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA XXN MS BAKER

PN296.

When you have gone out and accompanied detectives in the execution of these warrants, what is your role?‑‑‑Well, I would go out and I will assist in the search activity and I will - there’s - it’s necessary to make - as part of the warrant activity photographs are taken and a plan of the house is undertaken, so I will ensure that that’s done, obtain - sketch a plan of the premises and I will also record my observations of that premises so - insofar as any potential hazards that might be there. There might be dogs there, I’ll record that, because that needs to be recorded. If people - to execute another warrant at the premises members need to be aware of any dangers that are there. I’ll also engage in conversation with the persons that are at the premises and, again, that is - whilst I’m not - that’s building a rapport and that carries over into what’s called offender debriefing, which is a common activity and it’s something that TIOs are required to do. So at the end of that, then an information report is submitted, in regards to offender debriefing.

PN297.

How do you identify yourself when you go to these warrants?‑‑‑Well, once entry is gained, then you’re wearing your lanyard, your Victoria Police lanyard. I mean once you gain entry then you - then you identify yourself. As soon as you’ve gained entry you identify yourself as a member of the police force, we all do. We wouldn’t - we wouldn’t presume to do anything else. You know, once entry is gained, you - I think they know what’s going on. It’s before entry is gained that is the issue with identifying.

PN298.

But the detectives would be clearly identifiable, wouldn’t they, because they’d be - you’d be able to see their firearm and they’re also wearing a tabard which says “Victoria Police”?‑‑‑No, they’re not wearing a tabard that says “Victoria Police”. The detectives would be wearing - most of the time wearing clothing that concealed their equipment. But once - you know, once you’re in the premises and you’ve identified yourself, I mean you need to give them a copy of - the people that you’re executing the warrant on, you have to give them a copy of the search warrant. So the first thing the sergeant does is identifies themselves. Specifically I’m talking about pre-warrant execution and pre-warrant, we’re not putting it out there that we’re police because of those risks that I’ve highlighted previously, which is the destruction of evidence or the absconding of the person of interest from the address.

PN299.

In your role as a TIO, what percentage of your time is spent outside the office assisting investigators?‑‑‑I don’t know, I’ve never worked out the percentage of time.

PN300.

How often are you outside the office?‑‑‑Well, I think I gave evidence that in the time since I’ve been - in the last six months, bearing in mind my periods of absence and periods of incapacity, that I had been outside the office between 15 and 20 times.

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA XXN MS BAKER

PN301.

In relation to those warrants that we were just talking about, can you tell me what covert surveillance you did, in relation to those warrants?‑‑‑In relation to the ‑ ‑ ‑

PN302.

There were two. You said you went on two in 2014, because you had various reasons why you only did two?‑‑‑Mm.

PN303.

But on those two that you went out on, what covert surveillance was involved?‑‑‑Well, on those occasions I didn’t conduct the covert surveillance, other members of the team conducted the covert surveillance. So on those occasions, no, I - I didn’t do that. But that’s something that you generally do before conducting a warrant is that you do covert surveillance. Now, just because I wasn’t there to do that doesn’t mean that I’m not required to do that in the future, when there are other warrants.

PN304.

In paragraph 9 of your statement you state that you attend crime scenes and conduct surveillances of persons and addresses, how often do you do that?‑‑‑“This includes but is not limited to attendance at search warrants.” Well, in what period?

PN305.

Well, say over the last 12 months?‑‑‑Well, I don’t have the figures with me, but ‑ ‑ ‑

PN306.

But just give us - like give us a rough idea. You’re saying that you do this, I’m just trying to get an idea of how often you’d have to do that sort of thing?‑‑‑Well, that - it’s difficult to quantify, you know, and say how much of my time is spent doing that, but what I can say is that I do do those things. So in that - in that paragraph I’m talking about what my - my duties are, as a - as a TIO, working with detectives and those are the types of activities that I would undertake in the field.

PN307.

My understanding is that the core duties of TIOs are collection, collation and analysis of intelligence. Can you explain to the Commission what this involves?‑‑‑Collection, collation - what - as in ‑ ‑ ‑

PN308.

Collection, collation and analysis of intelligence?‑‑‑Well, that’s the intelligence process so you would collect intelligence, so that would involve - that’s what we’ve been talking about previously, that would be from a number of sources. That would be from both attending locations outside the office and making inquiries from within the office. Putting that into context, putting that information that’s been gathered into context and then analysing what that means, in respect of the particular thing that you’re looking at. So is that what you’re ‑ ‑ ‑

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA XXN MS BAKER

PN309.

Yes. Yes, I was just trying to get an understanding a bit more about the role. My instructions are that these are the routine tasks and that they’re performed on a daily basis, that’s correct, isn’t it, those tasks that we’ve just been talking about?‑‑‑They are some tasks that are performed on a daily basis, yes, collecting, evaluation, collating and analysing and then disseminating that intelligence. So, for example, if I was conducting analysis on a high risk community location, as defined in the Victoria Police intelligence doctrine, that involves going to the location and assessing the location, speaking to stakeholders at the location. Then coming back, I would put that with a number of other - with other information that was available to me through calls to 000, crime statistics at the location, from a number of other sources and putting that together to make an accurate assessment of the high risk community location so that it can be targeted appropriately by the area.

PN310.

In your witness evidence before, Mr Baldini showed you an email, dated 30 April, which is now PFA7, it was about the survey that was conducted?‑‑‑Yes.

PN311.

Would your response have been any different, to that survey, if you knew that an analysis of the role was being conducted?‑‑‑My response would have been - would have been different, in that I would have afforded that survey more of my time. When that - I had had discussions with Sergeant Keenos about the, as I said, the underutilising of my role within the sex offences unit. And my understanding was that that survey was to address that. Now, he had said that he would send out a survey to see whether that was across the board, or what were the activities of the TIOs across the board. I think I’ve even got the email here. Most certainly I - clearly this information was being gathered for a completely different purpose as to what’s stated in the email. It talks about time apportionment and attempt to clarify the extent to which tactical intelligence operatives are being utilised within the division. Now, yes - now, in retrospect, I see that this was - this was used for an entirely different purpose as to what’s been communicated in this email.

PN312.

But your answers would have been the same, surely?‑‑‑Well, I didn’t - as I recall, I didn’t stop and go through all my running sheets and go into great detail as to my activities to answer this - to answer this, you know, which I believe was just, you know, a generic - another generic email from Sergeant Keenos. I believe he was addressing this underutilisation of TIOs.

PN313.

Thank you. I’ve got no further question.

PN314.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Mr Baldini?

<RE-EXAMINATION BY MR BALDINI [3.14 PM]

PN315.

MR BALDINI: You were asked about what your understanding is of senior management’s attitude to you doing your work in plain clothes, what’s your understanding of what senior management has directed you to do, through their instructions on how you should do your job?‑‑‑Well, as a result of this - are we talking about Inspector Cooper’s statement in this matter, because what he’s saying in this statement is that we should do different duties as to what’s in the VPID and in our position descriptions.

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA RXN MR BALDINI

PN316.

So which is the higher level of management?‑‑‑Well, the higher level of management is the VPID, it’s the Victoria Police Intelligence Doctrine, that’s the - that’s the higher level of management. That’s endorsed across the organisation and accepted as best practice for an intelligence capacity within Victoria Police.

PN317.

Thank you. You were asked about your role when you go out on warrants?
‑‑‑Mm-hm.

PN318.

Are you involved if there’s evidence needs to be seized?‑‑‑Look, everybody has a role, that’s decided on before you go to a warrant. There’ll be a briefing and the detective who’s in charge of the warrant, whose warrant it is, who’s made application, will give that briefing and they will - will say they want somebody to do this job, somebody to do the other job, somebody to do general search and seize. Now, the - obviously there are a number of other roles, there’s got to be somebody who takes photographs, there’s got to be someone who does an exhibit log and somebody who - there’s got to be - the photographs have got to be recorded on a log. There’s somebody who’s got to be responsible for the security of the offenders, if they’re present.

PN319.

So what role are you given, as the specialist TIO?‑‑‑My role would be to - as I said, to take a sketch of the premises, to identify any hazards for the future and to - and there have been - well, there have been plenty of occasions where I’ve engaged with the offenders, or the other persons present, engaged them in conversation and then, in turn, that will go into an offender debrief report.

PN320.

If a, say on a drug warrant if a phone is seized, whose job would it be to analyse the addresses in the phone, for dealers and the like?‑‑‑Well, that is - the analysis of that is generally done by computer crime. Now, we are - they just don’t have the capacity to keep up with that so persons are being trained. We’ve got a system in order to do that and I’m awaiting training in that system. We’ve just got one in our office and it’s a capacity to download - safely download the data in that phone, in relation to what evidence might be on the phone. Now - but the crime investigation unit doesn’t do drug warrants, the divisional tasking unit does, and so that’s not something that would be common in my role.

PN321.

Okay. You were asked about how you identify yourself, is there any difference in the way you identify yourself to the public or the people at the warrant - sorry, let me rephrase that to make it more clear. Is there any difference between the way you identify yourself and the way the detectives identify themselves?‑‑‑No. No, there’s no difference. We wouldn’t - no.

**** ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA RXN MR BALDINI

PN322.

You said that on occasions - well on those two occasions that Ms Baker asked you about, you - you didn’t do the covert surveillance, but that is something you generally do and would do in the future. That was your evidence, as I understood it?‑‑‑Yes.

PN323.

Is it something you’ve done in the past?‑‑‑Yes, it’s something I’ve done in the past.

PN324.

You were taken to paragraph 9 and the tasks that you perform, do you have to perform these tasks without prior notice? Not all the time, but on occasions?‑‑‑I’ve lost my statement. Yes, I do perform those without prior notice. So one of those warrants I attended was without prior notice. I walked in and there was - the warrant had been applied for and given to the member the day before, but it was - as a result of their inquiries the person of interest wasn’t at the address. Now, we received some intelligence that morning, when I arrived at work, that it was an opportune time to execute the warrant, that the person of interest was going to be there, so I had no notice. I walked into work, said, “We’re going on a warrant, grab your gear, there’ll be a briefing in 10 minutes” and then we were out the door.

PN325.

I have no further questions.

PN326.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you for your evidence, you’re excused from further attendance?‑‑‑Thank you.

<THE WITNESS WITHDREW [3.21 PM]

PN327.

MR BALDINI: Might I request a five minute adjournment.

PN328.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Of course.

PN329.

MR BALDINI: Thank you.

PN330.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: We’ll adjourn for five minutes.

SHORT ADJOURNMENT [3.21 PM]

RESUMED [3.37 PM]

PN331.

MR BALDINI: I would like to call Leading Senior Constable Sven Eagles.

<SVEN JAMES EAGLES, SWORN [3.38 PM]

<EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MR BALDINI [3.38 PM]

PN332.

MR BALDINI: I would like to tender a further statement, completed by Mr Eagles yesterday.

**** SVEN JAMES EAGLES XN MR BALDINI

PN333.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes. PFA8.

EXHIBIT #PFA8 STATEMENT OF MR EAGLES

PN334.

MR BALDINI: Leading Senior Constable Eagles, is that statement - do you have a copy of that statement with you?‑‑‑Yes, I do, your Honour.

PN335.

Is that statement your further evidence-in-chief in relation to this matter?‑‑‑Yes, your Honour.

PN336.

I don’t propose to take the witness through his statement. Do you have a copy of the statement by Inspector Cooper?‑‑‑Yes, your Honour.

PN337.

The contention of that statement is that in performing your role you can be - you can perform your role in uniform, is that something you agree with?‑‑‑No, I disagree with that, your Honour.

PN338.

In just a few words - no, I won’t go there. We have an issue in that everyone - all of our witnesses disagree very strongly with Inspector Cooper, however I don’t think it’s good use of the Commission’s time for every single witness to give similar evidence. So in order to abbreviate the proceedings I propose to concentrate on a very small part of that statement.

PN339.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right.

PN340.

MR BALDINI: Thank you. Suffice it to say that Mr Eagles doesn’t agree with the inspector’s contention. Should the Commission indicate that the course is not satisfactory I’m more than happy to examine the witness, at length, on those statements.

PN341.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: It’s a matter for you, Mr Baldini.

PN342.

MR BALDINI: Sorry?

PN343.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: It’s a matter for you.

PN344.

MR BALDINI: I suspected that would be the case. Certainly the subsequent witnesses will go over Inspector Cooper’s statement in a great more detail and, as I say, I’m mindful that I don’t want to misuse the Commission’s time in this.

**** SVEN JAMES EAGLES XN MR BALDINI

PN345.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: All right.

PN346.

MR BALDINI: I’ll stick with my proposed course of action.

PN347.

Leading Senior Constable Eagles, can I take you to clause - to paragraph 20 of Inspector Cooper’s statement? Now, in that he says that he’s examined the 502 forms from TIOs in I&R units in this region, division 2, for the past six months and also their survey replies. So would you be one of those TIOs that’s put in 502s?‑‑‑Yes, that’s correct, your Honour.

I’d like to tender those 502s. As these have got details of police operations and names of the public, I’d ask that the evidence be suppressed, your Honour.

PN348.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Yes, we’ll mark it in-confidence.

PN349.

MR BALDINI: In-confidence, thank you.

PN350.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: And if you could, in the context of your evidence, not identify any particular person.

PN351.

MR BALDINI: Now, the statement by Inspector Cooper says, “The TIOs have been wearing plain clothes throughout this period.” Does that apply to you as well?‑‑‑Yes, that’s correct.

PN352.

It says that most have left their office no more than 10 times. Have you left your office more than 10 times?‑‑‑Yes. I’ve gone through my 502s and I’ve been out 16 times.

PN353.

Sixteen times. Are you able to take the Commission to those 16 examples quickly?

PN354.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I’ll mark that document as a confidential document and will issue an order accordingly and it will be PFA9.

EXHIBIT #PFA9 502 FORMS (MARKED IN-CONFIDENCE)

**** SVEN JAMES EAGLES XN MR BALDINI

PN355.

THE WITNESS: Your Honour, the documents that you have include 13 times because three times plain clothes weren’t an issue, but the 13 times that you have plain clothes were necessary for me to do my duties properly. It’s actually in order from most recent going backwards. On 30 January I was the only other person in the office with one of the other detectives and some information came through that there was an offender who was wanted, he needed support because he couldn’t go out by himself to make the arrest. I went out with him, in plain clothes. It was a situation where the person in question was alleged to be walking down a street. We needed to be in plain clothes so as not to spook him. We ended up finding him, arresting him. As part of the offender processing I was involved - well, I conducted an offender debrief. I went through his history, his telephones and banking records and things like that that he had with him, and I recorded all that for future intelligence use and put subsequent intelligence reports in regarding that.

PN356.

Why couldn’t you have done that in uniform?‑‑‑It’s a situation when I was working with - in a plain car, with a plain clothes detective. It’s a situation where this offender had run from police before and we needed to maintain - I use the word “covert” even though I’m not technically a covert unit, we needed to remain ‑ ‑ ‑

PN357.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: A less obvious presence?‑‑‑Yes, discrete. We needed to remain discrete in order that we could be more effective.

PN358.

MR BALDINI: Okay. Would you like to go to the second one?‑‑‑On 29 January 2015 I was out in a car with two other detectives. We’d been doing some other duties and they needed to do drive overs of some target addresses. It wasn’t directed related to inquiries that I wanted to make, but the plain clothes was necessary in order that they could remain discrete when they were doing their drive overs.

PN359.

Why were you with the detectives?‑‑‑I beg your pardon? Sorry?

PN360.

Why were you with the detectives?‑‑‑We’d actually been having a conference at a location outside the - outside the office at the time.

PN361.

Did you have any prior knowledge that you’d be doing these drive overs?‑‑‑No, I didn’t, your Honour.

PN362.

Okay. Next, please?‑‑‑On 27 January 2015 I was working in the office. There was only one other detective in the office at the time. The homicide squad wanted a drive over, for intelligence purposes, regarding a vehicle that they were looking for. I went out with the detective. Plain clothes was necessary because we needed to remain anonymous or not identifiable. And I went out and assisted her with the drive over. It was a country location, or rural property, I should say. She drove the vehicle while I used the binoculars to identify vehicles on the property.

PN363.

If you’d been spotted by someone, in uniform, what would the potential consequences have been?‑‑‑The homicide squad had told us that they were need - well, they didn’t want uniform attending because it’s a vehicle that they were searching for and they didn’t want it disposed of by the suspects.

**** SVEN JAMES EAGLES XN MR BALDINI

PN364.

Next one?‑‑‑On 6 January 2015 I was processing information reports and value adding to them. There was - the person of interest in the information report was - I’m actually, sorry, specifically referring to quarter past 3 in the afternoon.

PN365.

Yes, we went past the earlier note?‑‑‑Yes. I needed to confirm - there was an allegation that he was living at a particular address so I had to do a drive over alone, in plain clothes. It’s a matter that was to be investigated by detectives after me so it was important that I remain discrete so as not to alert the person of interest to our interest.

PN366.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: That’s the day you were in plain clothes for your appearance?‑‑‑That’s correct, your Honour.

PN367.

I didn’t regard myself as a person of interest.

PN368.

MR BALDINI: Yes, the next occasion?‑‑‑Yes, on 18 December I was working with one of the detectives in the office. He - part of my role I am more savvy with the computer and with technology than most of the detectives, or all of the detectives, and they’d had trouble getting closed-circuit television footage from one of the local service stations, regarding counterfeit currency being used, deceptions and other offences. So I went out with the detective. I assisted with getting the footage and we managed to do that. Then at the same time he wanted to do a drive over of a relevant address where the suspect was possibly living and we needed to do a discrete drive over at that address, which we did afterwards. I wasn’t actually aware of the drive over, prior to going out, it was something that he decided to do, after we’d been to the service station.

PN369.

Just a question about you being tasked to do these things. Is this your idea where you say, “I will do this” or how are you tasked?‑‑‑It’s about - I can’t really put a percentage on it, but sometimes they’re inquiries that I specifically want to make, to glean more information to add to information reports or to add to profiles on people or to investigate series of offences. It may be during the criminal investigation, it may be prior to the detectives being given the investigation. Other times they’re inquiries the detectives want to make. They either need my assistance or I happen to be out with them doing other things at the same time.

PN370.

What proportion of times would you be able to say, “I want to do this”?‑‑‑So you’re asking for - sorry, can you repeat the question?

**** SVEN JAMES EAGLES XN MR BALDINI

PN371.

I’m asking you how you’re tasked to actually do these duties. Are they self-tasked or are you tasked by the detectives or the sergeant or senior sergeant in charge of the CIU?‑‑‑I have a lot of freedom in my position and a lot of times they’re self-tasked but there are occasions when I am tasked by detectives or detective sergeants.

PN372.

Inspector Cooper said, “There is no operational reason for this shift.” Do you agree with that?‑‑‑No, I completely disagree with that, your Honour.

PN373.

Why?‑‑‑The detectives don’t ask me to do their job and I don’t ask the detectives to do my job. While their focus is gathering evidence for criminal court, my object is to gain information which can comprise of evidence to support the intelligence process to then, in turn, support them. If I don’t undertake the duties that I’m doing then I’m not supporting them properly and I’m not doing my job properly.

PN374.

Thank you. We’ll continue, we’re up to 4 December, I think?‑‑‑Yes, sorry. 4 December and 3 December are related. We had a series of copper thefts in our division and I proposed, like we do with second-hand dealers, we should visit the scrap metal dealers, obtain their records and rather than looking at offences from the crime scene, look at people who might be persons of interest, from our knowledge of them, as well as - that have been selling cooper products. So working backwards. So I went out with two of the - one of the detectives on one day, two detectives on another day, and we went and spoke to all the metal recycling places in our area.

PN375.

Could you have done this job effectively if you were in uniform?‑‑‑That job probably could be done in uniform, however going out with plain clothes detectives, they’re always wanting to do other things, as I’ve shown in some of the other 502s. So I would argue that we need to be in plain clothes when you’re working with other plain clothes members.

PN376.

The people at the various metal recyclers, would they have welcomed you - would they have preferred you to be in plain clothes or in uniform do you think?‑‑‑Undoubtedly in plain clothes. Some of the people we identified from those inquiries, or I identified from those inquiries, when I compared their records to our criminal databases, are offenders who have been selling copper. I don’t think that they would want to show that they are cooperating with police.

PN377.

26 November?‑‑‑26 November I was working as the duty analyst, on an afternoon shift. There was also a crime shift of detectives working from my office. At about 4 o’clock there was a report of some suspicious Irish nationals doing a roof restoration nearby and possibly in a stolen car, and I went out to assist the detectives with that. When we got there we managed to approach them, we were in plain clothes, we managed to approach them without them being aware that we were police. There was four of them and three of us and I then assisted the detectives with processing those people, as well as combining as much information about where they were from and what they were doing and putting in intelligence reports afterwards.

**** SVEN JAMES EAGLES XN MR BALDINI

PN378.

Would you have been hampered in doing this job if you’d been in uniform?‑‑‑Yes. They were decidedly anti-police. They gave us attitude and were lying to us and I think that had marked vehicles rocked up it may have ended in a different scenario.

PN379.

The 25th?‑‑‑On 25 November and also on 21 November, prior to 21 November one of the sergeants who has the outlawed motorcycle gang portfolio in our office had asked me to make some inquiries about links between local tattoo parlours and one of our outlawed motorcycle gangs. I’d done a lot of work in the office about making inquiries, by telephone and emails and things like that, and decided that we needed to do walk overs of the relevant tattoo shops and glean some intelligence by looking at what they had advertised on the windows and things like that. I did walk overs of those places with the detective and gleaned email addresses, telephone numbers, and got descriptions of the people who were standing out the front, in my opinion quite obviously sort of as a security type presence.

PN380.

21 November?‑‑‑Sorry, just covered that one. That was related to 25 November.

PN381.

Okay, that was the same inquiry. 9 October?‑‑‑On 9 October I was asked by a detective to come and help look at a - she was actually an offender who he had processed for an offence but she was being cooperative and was allowing him to go through her computer, in order to provide evidence regarding some co‑offenders. He took me with him because of my greater computer expertise. She’s a well-known offender in our area who has got links to outlawed motorcycle gangs and crime, and I went to her house, with the detective, in plain clothes, to look through her computer.

PN382.

What would have happened if you turned up in uniform?‑‑‑She was assisting us and she has a substantial network of criminal associates. It allowed us to go there more discretely and not advertise the fact to the neighbourhood that she was cooperating with the police.

PN383.

Could you have got your job done if you’d been in uniform?‑‑‑If I’d been wearing a uniform that - the detective would not have taken me with him.

PN384.

So that’s October, what about September, were you at work during September?‑‑‑I did work during September, your Honour, yes.

PN385.

But nothing arose?‑‑‑But when I look through my running sheets I didn’t identify anything.

**** SVEN JAMES EAGLES XN MR BALDINI

PN386.

So were there any of those jobs that you’ve taken the Commission to where you were along but didn’t really need to be there?‑‑‑No, your Honour. In order for me to do my job properly I have to get involved with the investigations in the office, otherwise I’m useless.

PN387.

Inspector Cooper’s evidence is that no intelligence report was submitted, do you agree with that?‑‑‑I completely disagree with that. Of the 13 times that I went out in plain clothes I either submitted a specific intelligence report or - and/or added to a person of interest’s dossier or information on our criminal database or added information to the information report that I was already working on.

PN388.

I’ve already asked you, and this is by way of emphasis, I asked you about one of them, but in relation to this group of shifts would you agree with the evidence or the statement that says, “There is no operational reason for this shift” or, I presume, “these shifts”?‑‑‑I completely disagree with that comment.

PN389.

Could I take you to paragraph 21? Again, this is evidence that’s going to be gone over by other witnesses, so I’ll just briefly take you through each of these statements. Do you agree that position description that says:

Provide assistance during search, seize and arrest activities, including surveillance and covert operations for intelligence purposes, as appropriate.

Do you agree that that does not mean deployed to the field?‑‑‑I completely disagree with that.

PN390.

Would you like to say why you disagree with that?‑‑‑When the detectives - there is court rulings that have already dictated that you can’t gather information at a search warrant, specifically for intelligence purposes. But the evidence that is gathered at a search warrant for Criminal Court is still supporting intelligence, because it’s information that is relevant to that person, to that address and to inquiries that I’m making, from an intelligence point of view. It’s important that I’m there. Seeing all this with my own eyes, helping search, I have a much better understanding of the offenders and how they’re living and who they’re associating with and who is at the address than if I’m not there and I can do my job much better.

PN391.

Inspector Cooper says, “The work of TIOs is reasonably predictable.” Do you agree with that?‑‑‑There are predictable elements to our job, producing a daily summary every moving is one of them, but then there’s a lot where five minute - when you’re investigating something or looking at some new crime that’s come across my desk I will either decide to make inquiries or work with the investigators and come to a conclusion we need to make certain inquiries. That can lead us to leave the office five minutes later to make that inquiry. It’s not predictable like an office job. It does change, depending on what’s been happening and what inquiries need to be made.

**** SVEN JAMES EAGLES XN MR BALDINI

PN392.

Inspector Cooper says that intelligence officers cannot seize items for intelligence purposes, do you agree with that?‑‑‑You can’t seize items - from my understanding, you can’t seize items for intelligence purposes that are outside the scope of the search warrant. So if it’s not relating to the crimes that you’re investigating you can’t seize it. But if it’s something that is relevant to that person’s involvement in the crime you’re investigating and it’s going to lead you to other avenues of inquiry, and it may lead you to other evidence, then it is definitely able to be seized.

PN393.

Inspector Cooper says that the search - normally search warrants were executed by the SOCAIT and none of these were covert, do you agree with that?‑‑‑I’ve never worked with the SOCAIT so I can’t actually answer that question.

PN394.

Okay, that’s fair enough. Yes. Inspector Cooper says he spoke to over 40 detectives and none of them refused to work with a TIO on the basis that they were in uniform. What’s your response to that?‑‑‑Your Honour, I spoke to all the detectives in the office where I’m working, at Yarra Ranges CIU, and they told me that if I was in uniform they wouldn’t take me out. It’s not that they wouldn’t refuse to work with me, but because of the nature of their inquiries I wouldn’t be involved in anything outside the office.

PN395.

The attendance of uniform members will not compromise the execution of a warrant.

Do you agree with that? That’s (h)?‑‑‑Yes. There are times when - sometimes that may be true. Sometimes the warrant isn’t executed by driving up to the front door, getting out, knocking on the door and being let in. Sometimes where you need to sit off the address and watch the address to make sure that people are home, the right people are home, that the targets haven’t left the property, that a car hasn’t arrived that we’re unaware of. Effectively we need to do some static surveillance in the moments before the warrant. And I have been on warrants where sometimes they’ll decide it’s not the best time to execute the warrant. If we’re in marked cars or wearing uniform the targets would be aware of our interest in them at that point. But I have been on warrants where we’ve driven away and we’ve come back at another time and executed it later on.

PN396.

(i):

There will be no difference of the role of a TIO in uniform as mostly work is performed in the office.

**** SVEN JAMES EAGLES XN MR BALDINI

PN397.

Do you agree with that?‑‑‑No, I don’t - well, there’s sort of two parts to that. A lot of my work is performed in the office but my role as TIO at Yarra Ranges CI would definitely be affected if I didn’t leave the office. Some of the inquiries are inquiries that I’m making that the detectives aren’t part of at that stage. I wouldn’t be able to produce the same level of intelligence for them. I wouldn’t be able to put the links together between crimes and then provide it to them and it would really compromise my ability to do my job properly.

PN398.

There have been a number of assertions that there is no covert work performed by the TIOs

Do you agree with that?‑‑‑We’re not a covert unit, your Honour. However, we need to be discrete, fly under the radar as much as possible at times. I think I’ve already explained that. We’re not an undercover unit or a surveillance unit, but we do need to do work where we go unidentified.

PN399.

So to take the opposite of the covert, which I presume would be overt?‑‑‑Yes, we ‑ ‑ ‑

PN400.

Is there work that you perform that cannot be done if it’s overt?‑‑‑Yes, that’s correct, your Honour.

PN401.

All right. I fear I may have led the witness a little there.

PN402.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Your fear is well substantiated.

PN403.

MR BALDINI: Could you comment on that little bit of leading ‑ ‑ ‑

PN404.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I think I understand the proposition that’s being advanced by the witness, namely that, and correct me if I’m wrong, as I understand your evidence there are times where the wearing of the uniform would be a hindrance to an effective performance of your task?‑‑‑Yes, your Honour. Can I go further?

PN405.

Yes, please?‑‑‑Your Honour, the main point is that those times aren’t really known and in a lot of cases until immediately before it happens.

PN406.

Yes. And as I also understood your evidence, there’ll be times that you’ll go to do one job and the detective will want to do another job?‑‑‑That’s correct, your Honour.

PN407.

And that would be frustrated by you being in uniform so it would interrupt the flow of any other investigation?‑‑‑Yes. I think that it wouldn’t be long before they stopped taking me out.

**** SVEN JAMES EAGLES XN MR BALDINI

PN408.

MR BALDINI: Is the term “covert work” does that have a technical meaning?

PN409.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Within Victoria Police?

PN410.

MR BALDINI: Within Victoria Police.

PN411.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I would have thought so.

PN412.

MR BALDINI: I mean the plain meaning of the words “covert work” means that you’re working without being overt, which is where I’m trying to head with my final question.

PN413.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I think you can lead, in relation to that, it’s not a contentious issue.

PN414.

MR BALDINI: Yes. Is there a further technical meaning to the term covert work?‑‑‑I think that Victoria Police command would deem certain units to be covert units, such as the undercover unit and the surveillance unit, and we wouldn’t fall under that definition. But some of the work, that being said, that we do, is covert by the definition of the word.

PN415.

Thank you. 22(b) refers to some of the functions done by TIOs, “Attend high risk community locations.” Is that something that you can do in uniform, or effectively do in uniform? I suppose you can always turn up in uniform?‑‑‑High risk community locations are areas where we identify that there is ongoing issues regarding public order, crime, traffic, et cetera, and those areas end up being analysed, environment scans and that sort of thing, and then strategies are made to try and reduce the problem. To attend those areas in uniform, you don’t get to see the true behaviour of the people visiting those. In my patch the railway station - there’s probably a lot of patches - is one specific area, because a lot of the offenders use the public transport system. As soon as a marked car turns up you don’t see any of the natural behaviour that goes on. So you get much more benefit out of attending those areas in plain clothes.

PN416.

“Prepare intelligence briefs” is that something that requires you to do plain clothes work?‑‑‑When I compile intelligence briefs I’m using all the available information that I’ve got and in a lot of cases that includes the walk overs and things like that. So at times, yes, I definitely need to be in plain clothes to do those effectively.

PN417.

You speak with other TIOs from around the state, from other regions?‑‑‑Primarily from Eastern Division 1 and Eastern Division 2, yes.

**** SVEN JAMES EAGLES XN MR BALDINI

PN418.

But you also have something to do with TIOs from other regions as well?‑‑‑In my day-to-day job, yes, I will speak with them on the phone most of the time.

PN419.

Are you aware of any of the other TIOs that are required to work in uniform?‑‑‑No, your Honour.

PN420.

Would you say in your job that you interview suspects?‑‑‑There are - yes, I do interview suspects at times. Sometimes I am involved with the criminal official interview but there’s also offender debriefing after those occur in which we ask them questions about their living arrangements, who they’re associating with, who their partners are, what they’re - you know, all the usual stuff to gather intelligence for the future.

PN421.

Do you give evidence in court?‑‑‑I actually haven’t given evidence in court.

PN422.

You haven’t?‑‑‑As a TIO I haven’t, although currently I’m standby for a culpable driving trial.

PN423.

So you could do?‑‑‑Yes.

PN424.

Do you conduct surveillance?‑‑‑Yes, your Honour.

PN425.

Do you compile warrants?‑‑‑I provide information that contributes - yes, I assist with compiling warrants. I don’t write the ‑ ‑ ‑

PN426.

Do you execute warrants?‑‑‑Yes, I assist with executing warrants, your Honour.

PN427.

Do you investigate reported crime?‑‑‑Yes, your Honour.

PN428.

Do you investigate suspected criminal activity?‑‑‑Yes, your Honour.

PN429.

Okay. No further questions.

PN430.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you.

PN431.

MS BAKER: Could I only have five minutes?

PN432.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: You can have a lot longer if you want. I can adjourn if you ‑ ‑ ‑

PN433.

MS BAKER: I haven’t got the witness’s first statement with me.

**** SVEN JAMES EAGLES XN MR BALDINI

PN434.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I see. Why don’t we just stand it over before you cross-examine and you’ll have an opportunity - that means you’ll still be here next time, I’m afraid.

PN435.

What I will do is I won’t give you a time now, because I need to look at my diary and see whether I can shuffle anything around, but it’s unlikely to be this month, but I’ll try and make it very early next month, in March, we’ll continue on with that matter. That is, unless you resolve it in the meantime.

PN436.

MR BALDINI: We’ve expressed to the force what we believe is sort of a resolution, unfortunately they haven’t proceeded(?) to our most reasonable - in our view, most reasonable suggestion.

**** SVEN JAMES EAGLES XN MR BALDINI

PN437.

THE DEPUTY PRESIDENT: I make no comment. I will allow you to continue with your efforts, may they bear fruit. Matter is adjourned.

<THE WITNESS WITHDREW [4.16 PM]

ADJOURNED TO A DATE TO BE FIXED [4.16 PM]

LIST OF WITNESSES, EXHIBITS AND MFIs

ANITRA HELEN DUNSHEA, SWORN [12.29 PM]........................................... PN106

EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MR BALDINI [12.29 PM].............................. PN106

CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS BAKER [2.46 PM]........................................ PN263

RE-EXAMINATION BY MR BALDINI [3.14 PM]............................................ PN314

THE WITNESS WITHDREW [3.21 PM].............................................................. PN326

SVEN JAMES EAGLES, SWORN [3.38 PM]...................................................... PN331

EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF BY MR BALDINI [3.38 PM]................................ PN331

THE WITNESS WITHDREW [4.16 PM].............................................................. PN436

EXHIBIT FA2 WITNESS STATEMENT OF MS WILSHIRE.............................. PN81

EXHIBIT FA3 (CONFIDENTIAL) VICTORIA POLICE INTELLIGENCE DOCTRINE PN99

EXHIBIT FA4 WITNESS STATEMENT OF MS DUNSHEA............................ PN120

EXHIBIT FA5 DOCUMENT RELATING TO TACTICAL INTELLIGENCE OPERATIVES PN14

EXHIBIT FA6 DIU DUTY ANALYST REQUIREMENTS DATED 13/05/2014.........

................................................................................................................................. PN165

EXHIBIT FA7 SURVEY EMAIL......................................................................... PN173

EXHIBIT FA8 STATEMENT OF MR EAGLES.................................................. PN333

EXHIBIT FA9 502 FORMS (MARKED IN-CONFIDENCE)............................. PN354

Fair Work Commission Transcripts

C2014/1198, Transcript of Proceedings [2015] FWCTrans 180 (30 March 2015)