A police officer has defended his decision not to send a police van out to a woman’s home despite receiving a report that a man, Graham Wood, was acting suspiciously outside the property and had previously been escorted from it by police.
Wood murdered his former partner, Kelly Thompson, in her Point Cook home at some time between 9 February and 10 February last year. Just after midnight on 9 February last year, a neighbour of Thompson’s, Norman Paskin, called police to report Wood had parked his van down the street and was lurking outside Thompson’s home.
At the inquest into Thompson’s death before Melbourne’s coroners court on Thursday, the constable who took the call, Sean Pringle, was pressed on why he did not send a police van to the home that night despite hearing Paskin’s concern that Wood should not be at the home, and had entered the property after wandering around outside.
“I was of the opinion that a crime had not been committed and there was no indication based on the information I’d been given that someone was in danger,” Pringle told the coroner, Ian Gray.
“I asked the neighbour to keep an eye on the address, and [said] ‘If you hear yelling or screaming coming from that address please do not hesitate to call me back.’ I said given that there were too many unknowns I am not going to send a patrol van based on the information you have given me.”
Giving evidence in June, Paskin said he told Pringle he suspected an intervention order may be in place because he had previously seen police escorting Wood from the property with his belongings.
However, Pringle told the court on Thursday that he did not check the police system to see if there was an intervention out against Wood because Paskin had not given him an exact street address or Wood’s name.
Pringle said he had been given only the intersection of the two streets where Thompson’s home was, and an exact name or street address was required to run a check.
Counsel assisting, Rachel Ellyard, put it to Pringle that it was his job to get the information, and asked him why he had not used Google maps to obtain the address and to run the check. Pringle responded that at the time he had not been aware that Google maps could be used in that way.
Had he checked the system, Pringle agreed he would have seen an intervention order had been taken out by Thompson against Wood, and this would have prompted him to send a police patrol.
Pringle, who joined the police force in November 2011 and graduated as a constable in 2012, said on the night of the phone call all police vans at his command were out on a high-priority job responding to a siege. There were no senior police officers with him to get advice from.
Pringle also believed he would be criticised by more senior police if he had called through the Thompson job to police command to respond to, given the limited information he had been given and the strain on resources that night.
Hearing that Wood had previously been escorted from Thompson’s property was not enough to trigger concern at the time.
“It was common for police to be at an address for something as simple as a property exchange or a number of other reasons that does not necessarily mean a man is excluded from the address,” Pringle said.
The inquest into Thompson’s death began in June. Gray will explore what, if anything, could have been done differently to prevent her murder.
A senior solicitor from Shine Lawyers, Paula Shelton, representing the Thompson family, said the family hoped the inquest would result in solid recommendations to help stop people being killed by family violence.
“Through the inquest, we want to raise and examine the police response to Kelly’s calls for help and the lack of protection offered to her,” Shelton said.
“We must also examine the lack of support available to women in Kelly’s position. An intervention order is only a piece of paper unless it’s enforced by police, so we need to look at whether enough is being done to hold offenders accountable.”
The inquest continues.
