An Independent Police Conduct Authority inquiry has found a pursuit of a van which had rammed a police car was justified even though permission was not granted for it.
Photo: RNZ / Richard Tindiller
Police were called to reports of a man sleeping in a van outside a pre-school in the Christchurch suburb of Woolston in 2018.
The van was also of interest to police in relation to a hit and run incident which had occurred seven weeks earlier.
When officers approached the vehicle to talk to the man he told them to f**k off before ramming into their police car.
A initial pursuit begun - it ended 92 seconds later but police continued looking for the van.
Officers asked permission to start a second pursuit which they did so - without getting permission from the communications controller.
During the second pursuit the man rang 111 and told the dispatcher to make the police officers "get away from me", and that he wanted to end his life.
The van collided with another patrol car, the man struggled with officers which led to a police dog being used in his arrest.
Police provided him with first aid at the scene for a bite to his lower right arm and later took him to hospital for treatment.
An IPCA inquiry found officers were justified in pursuing the driver but officers should have communicated better throughout it.
"The Pursuit Controller acknowledged officers should not have engaged in a pursuit until permission had been granted, but also said he should have been quicker to grant it: "I should have got out the permission granted but then the circumstances took over," the report said.
Permission for the second pursuit was not given till 1:42 minutes after it was asked for.
The report also found officers should not have continued looking for the van after the first pursuit had stopped.
"Officers lacked understanding of what was permitted during the inquiry phase, and actively searched for the van immediately after the pursuit had been abandoned was in breach of policy.
"It was reasonable for the officers to engage in the second pursuit, but the decision to allow it should have been communicated earlier," the findings said.
Police have acknowledged the IPCA findings.
Canterbury District Commander Superintendent John Price said the man's behaviour during the incident raised significant concerns.
"After fleeing from police, he deliberately rammed police vehicles, evaded road spikes, and threatened to harm himself.
"It is clear to me that the priority of the officers throughout the response to this incident was to ensure that the matter was resolved safely, with no harm coming to either the man involved or innocent members of the public," superintendent Price said.
A number of lessons have been learnt since the incident he said.
"It is also apparent that there was not a clear understanding among the officers of what is permitted during an inquiry phase of a pursuit, leading officers to continue searching for the fleeing driver after the pursuit had been abandoned.
"These points have been addressed with both the officers involved and as part of wider communications to Canterbury District staff," said superintendent Price.
"Based on those learning's, if a similar situation were to arise in the future, my expectation is that a pursuit would not be initiated."
The driver who was 21 at the time was convicted of a number of offences in relation to the incident, including operating a motor vehicle recklessly, failing to stop for police and resisting police.