Connect with us

Politics

IPCA Finds Senior Police Bypassed Integrity Checks in McSkimming Case

Editorial

Published

on

The Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) has released a report detailing serious procedural failures by senior police officials in the handling of allegations against former Police Deputy Commissioner Jevon McSkimming. The report, made public on November 11, 2024, indicates that instead of investigating complaints made against McSkimming, police leaders pursued legal action against the woman who reported him.

This case centers on complaints from a female officer, referred to in the report as ‘Ms Z’. She alleged that McSkimming engaged in sexual activity without consent, threatened to use an intimate recording, and misused police property. Rather than conducting a thorough investigation into her claims, police focused their efforts on prosecuting her under the Harmful Digital Communications Act. The charge against Ms Z was recently dropped by the Crown.

The IPCA’s findings, stemming from events that took place in 2023 and early 2024, highlight what it describes as “serious misconduct” by the police leadership. As the authority noted, the only investigation initiated centered on potential offences by the complainant, which led to her prosecution instead of McSkimming being held accountable.

Leadership Failures Exposed

The IPCA report criticizes several senior police officials, including former Commissioner Andrew Coster, two deputy commissioners, and an assistant commissioner. Evidence suggests they failed to act despite receiving numerous complaints through emails, social media, and the police reporting line.

When the case was finally referred to the IPCA in October 2024, Coster attempted to influence the scope and timing of the investigation. The authority stated this action appeared aimed at protecting McSkimming’s chances of being appointed as the next commissioner. Additionally, the report noted that Coster did not disclose his awareness of the relationship during earlier appointment processes.

The IPCA concluded that these missteps “undermined the integrity of the organisation as a whole,” revealing significant flaws in how senior police manage internal integrity risks. The report called for enhanced oversight, legislative reforms, and greater accountability for senior police conduct.

Apologies and Forward Steps

In response to the findings, Police Commissioner Richard Chambers issued a public apology to the complainant, stating, “The ambitions of a senior police officer were put above the interests of a vulnerable woman. She was ignored and badly let down. That was unacceptable.” Chambers described the report as outlining “appalling reading” that reflects a “total lack of leadership and integrity at the highest levels” of the police force.

Chambers also noted that most individuals implicated in the report have since left the organisation. An independent King’s Counsel will oversee any necessary employment investigations. He confirmed that a comprehensive integrity reform programme is currently underway, including enhancements to the National Integrity Unit and revisions to the Police Code of Conduct.

Chambers emphasized the importance of ensuring that the public feels safe reporting sexual assault, stating, “The absolute worst outcome would be if anyone felt unsafe reporting sexual assault to police. I want to reassure you that is not the case.”

The IPCA has urged for significant reforms to improve the independence of misconduct investigations and to ensure ministerial and parliamentary scrutiny in future integrity cases. The report underlined that while the majority of officers act with fairness, the failures in this case illustrate a pressing need for a “sustained plan of action” to restore public trust in law enforcement.

The team focuses on bringing trustworthy and up-to-date news from New Zealand. With a clear commitment to quality journalism, they cover what truly matters.

Trending

Copyright © All rights reserved. This website offers general news and educational content for informational purposes only. While we strive for accuracy, we do not guarantee the completeness or reliability of the information provided. The content should not be considered professional advice of any kind. Readers are encouraged to verify facts and consult relevant experts when necessary. We are not responsible for any loss or inconvenience resulting from the use of the information on this site.