Christchurch police chase: officers failed to contact man who rammed the patrol twice

Police failed to effectively communicate with a man found sleeping outside a Christchurch preschool, who led them on a chase and struck a patrol car twice.

The police officers were justified in pursuing, but did not communicate effectively, the Independent Police Conduct Authority has found.

In December 2018, police received a call about a man acting suspiciously in a van in front of a preschool in Woolston, Christchurch.

He had been sleeping in the truck.

As the man drove away, officers motioned for him to stop, but he rammed his police vehicle twice.

A chase began, but was abandoned 92 seconds later, as the pursuit controller mistakenly believed that the man’s identity was known and that he was most likely located through investigations.

Police searched and located the vehicle and resumed the chase after it was established that the identity of the driver was unknown.

The IPCA has found that it was not unreasonable for the chase controller to allow the second chase to continue at this point, however, it should have ensured that permission was granted at that time.

“This was an unusual situation where the officers had good reason to want to confirm the identity of the driver,” says the IPCA report.

“They had been told that the man slept in his truck outside the preschool and therefore did not have a fixed address, did not stop when instructed and committed a crime when he rammed the officers’ vehicle.

“This was not the first time that police had been told that the van was parked outside the preschool. The van had also been involved in a previous unrelated incident,” said Authority Chairman Judge Colin Doherty.

The authority determined that officers did not understand what activity was allowed after a manhunt was abandoned.

The chase controller and officers should have communicated more effectively during the chase, the IPCA said in its decision.

The man drove at low speed during the chase, yet continued to ram police vehicles, avoided at least three sets of spikes on the road, and during the chase the 111 sounded saying he wanted to end his life.

The re-started chase should have been abandoned when the man drove through the courtyard of a gas station, however the officers did not provide the necessary and accurate information on this to the communications center.

The eight-minute chase ended when the man’s truck collided with a slow-speed police car. The man fought with officers, leading to the use of the police dog.

In its decision, the IPCA said the officers were justified in initiating a manhunt, but that throughout the manhunt, critical information was not communicated between the officers and the communications center to allow for effective risk assessments.

An officer was also justified in using his police dog to aid in the man’s arrest, he found.

Police said in a statement that they acknowledged the findings.

“As the IPCA president noted, this was an unusual situation, where officers had good reason to want to confirm the identity of the driver,” said Superintendent John Price, Canterbury district commander.

“It is clear to me that the priority of the officers during the response to this incident was to ensure that the matter was resolved safely, without harm to the man involved or innocent members of the public.”

“However, it is also apparent that there was no clear understanding among officers of what is allowed during an investigative phase of a chase, leading officers to continue searching for the fleeing driver after the chase had been abandoned.

“These points have been discussed with the officials involved and as part of broader communications with Canterbury district staff.”

He also noted that the incident took place almost two years ago.

“Several lessons have been learned in that time, both from this incident and from reviews of other fleeing driver events.

“Based on those learnings, if a similar situation arose in the future, my expectation is that a search would not be initiated.”

The driver, who was 21 years old at the time of the incident, was convicted of various crimes related to the incident, including recklessly operating a motor vehicle, failing to stop before the police and resisting the police.