Non-compliance with the authorisation requirements of s 464K(7) of the Crimes Act 1958 (Vic) deprives police officers of the statutory defence to a civil assault claim for using force to take fingerprints, even though s 464Q addresses the consequences of non-compliance only in the context of admissibility of fingerprint evidence in criminal proceedings. The fact that s 464Q provides a discretionary admissibility regime for criminal proceedings does not mean that a contravening act is to be treated as lawful for the purposes of a civil defence. Self-defence by a police officer who strikes a restrained person in custody with full force will not be established where the factual basis for the claimed threat is not supported by the evidence, and even if it were, the force used was grossly disproportionate to any perceived threat.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 10 later cases that cite this judgment.
3 of the 10 citing cases carry a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.