Under cross-examination earlier this week, Henderson said he used such language only “very rarely” during an arrest, under exigent circumstances.

The Crown prosecutor alleged Henderson also hit the boy forcefully to the head, then turned the teen to his side, said, “How old are you, you little f—wit”, and told him to wake up as he hit him to the face. The Crown argued the officer struck the teen in anger.

‘I didn’t strike him the first time, the second one was to get him out of shock so I could get him talking.’

Leading Senior Constable David John Henderson

Henderson denied the first hit and said the second was an open-hand tap of one out of 10, which he felt was necessary. “I didn’t strike him the first time, the second one was to get him out of shock so I could get him talking,” he told the court on Monday.

Meanwhile, the Crown argued, Piovesan took three back-seat passengers and put them on the ground, punched one whose hands were on his head, which he denied, and called him a “f—ing little c—” (Piovesan said he used the word “c—” in the plural, to refer to several boys).

The boy told the court he was punched to the ribs, and that he was winded.

The Crown argued that Piovesan hit the teen because he was angry, and that the level of force was not necessary. “It was done in anger, it was done to punish [the teen], it was done to make [the teen scared],” the prosecutor said in his closing address on Wednesday.

However, Piovesan told the court earlier this week that he was not angry, but frightened. “I was more worried about them killing someone or themselves,” he said.

The Crown alleged Piovesan also struck a second boy, which the officer said was not a hit but rather a palm heel strike that he considered necessary because the boys were wriggling and trying to get away.

‘I was more worried about them killing someone or themselves.’

Senior Constable Adrian Robert Piovesan

About the same time, footage played to the court shows Piovesan said, “f—ing spastic idiots … I hope youse are all f—ing scared now, eh”. The officer said that comment was intended to ensure the teens knew the seriousness of the situation.

“The consequences may have been horrendous,” Piovesan said.

The court heard Piovesan lost his body-worn camera in the days after the incident. The Crown argued the loss was “merely part of a deception to hide it”.

Henderson logged his body-worn camera footage of the incident alongside a different job, the inspection of a local club. The Crown argued he deliberately hid the recording, but he said it was an error.

The Crown also said Henderson was heard admitting things got a “bit rough” during the incident.

“Crown submits the accused David Henderson having watched the recording thought that he and the accused [Piovesan] had been too rough … too rough, used too much force, used force that was not reasonably necessary,” he told the court on Wednesday.

In his closing address – which will continue on Thursday – Henderson’s barrister, Wasilenia, said the incident happened at night, in an isolated area, and involved a car with a then-unknown number of occupants that had been accused of break-ins and was driving at dangerous speeds to avoid police.

“The degree of force used by Henderson … was within his reasonable belief that it was necessary to effect the arrest and could not be considered … to be disproportionate to the evil to be prevented,” he said.

The trial continues.

Read More: World News | Entertainment News | Celeb News
SMH

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You May Also Like

Former Bills Starter’s Wife Posts Message After Signing With Rams

Getty Former Bills cornerback Tre’Davious White on September 10, 2017. The Buffalo…

Doctor Explains To Us How Kate Middleton’s Preventive Chemo Could Take Physical & Mental Toll

Dr. Eleonora Teplinsky, head of the breast and gynecologic medical oncology department…

How Ukraine will finally get its €50bn from Brussels

Stay informed with free updates Simply sign up to the War in…