Key facts
- Two police officers, Andrew David Couchman and Ulrich Weiss, were charged over an incident in January 2024.
- The incident involved the use of capsicum spray, Tasers, and restraints on a "vulnerable" First Nations man.
- The man, 23 at the time, was diagnosed with schizophrenia and described as cognitively and emotionally vulnerable.
- A detective inserted a "false" account into the alleged victim's statement regarding consent, which was a key element for the charges.
- A district court judge permanently stayed the case, finding that a fair trial could not be guaranteed.
A district court judge has permanently stayed criminal charges against two police officers accused of using excessive force on a "vulnerable" First Nations man in custody. Senior Constables Andrew David Couchman, 54, and Ulrich Weiss, 45, were charged over an incident at the Mareeba watch house in far north Queensland in January 2024.
Judge Dean Morzone KC found that a fair trial could not be guaranteed because the investigating detective, Det Sen Sgt. Kim Cavell, inserted a "false" account into the alleged victim's statement. The man, who was 23 at the time and diagnosed with schizophrenia, had a paragraph added to his statement claiming he "did not consent" to being Tasered, sprayed, or restrained, despite not having used those words and not understanding the concept of consent.
The court heard that during the incident, the man was described as "aggressive and non-compliant" and attempted to spit at officers. He was sprayed with capsicum spray, Tasered four times, and left restrained in a "violent detention cell" for over two hours. The judge noted that while CCTV and body-worn camera footage existed, it could not record the man's understanding of consent.
Despite arguments from prosecutors that the trial should proceed in the public interest, Judge Morzone ruled that the "fundamental defect" in the proceedings, stemming from the fabricated statement, went to the root of the trial and could not be rectified. He stated that vulnerable detainees are entitled to legal protection and that the community expects such allegations to be tried publicly, but a permanent stay was necessary in this instance.