news, crime,
The prosecution of one of the country’s former top cops has been slammed as “utter madness” after he walked out of court “an innocent man”. A magistrate’s decision to find Ramzi Jabbour not guilty on Friday marked the end of a prolonged legal battle for the ex-Australian Federal Police deputy commissioner, who was charged with gun possession and abuse of public office offences. Mr Jabbour was considered a frontrunner to take over the agency’s top position before he was stood down in 2019 and later charged. During a lengthy hearing in the ACT Magistrates Court, prosecutor David Jordan alleged Mr Jabbour had unlawfully possessed his AFP-issued pistol on the way to and from a location in NSW, where he allowed relatives to fire it at kangaroos. The court heard two of Mr Jabbour’s relatives had discharged the Glock a combined nine times. While “kangaroos were killed that day” in October 2018, it was unclear whether Mr Jabbour’s relatives, who were not police officers, or AFP personnel also on the trip had fired the fatal shots. Mr Jordan alleged Mr Jabbour knew he should not have had the gun at the relevant time, saying he had returned it to his office safe at 4.30am the next day “to avoid scrutiny”. The court also heard the senior officer had spoken of organising a “hunt”, and that he had later bought beer and gift cards for the subordinates who helped arrange the outing. But Magistrate James Stewart said on Friday the prosecution had failed to prove Mr Jabbour had been off-duty or that he had known exactly what was to happen on the trip, which was organised by the AFP. Mr Stewart said kangaroos had previously been killed at the suppressed location in a permitted activity and Mr Jabbour may have been there in performance of his duties, allowing him to have the gun, despite the fact he was on leave at the time. The magistrate also noted no charges were laid over the firing of Mr Jabbour’s gun, and the hearing was “not a royal commission” into the use of AFP weapons. The other allegation against Mr Jabbour was that he had abused his public office by dishonestly obtaining a benefit for a relative. The prosecution claimed Mr Jabbour had “induced” then-AFP legal officer Thomas McBride to provide “a steer” on the law of torts under the guise of it being for his own further studies, when it was actually intended to help with a child’s homework. Mr Stewart found the request, emailed by Mr Jabbour at 4.18am, had clearly not arisen from the then-deputy commissioner’s AFP duties. But in clearing Mr Jabbour, he found there was no evidence the man had exercised undue influence over Mr McBride or caused the legal officer’s professional workload to increase. In light of the verdicts, Mr Stewart ordered the prosecution to pay Mr Jabbour’s legal costs. Outside court, defence barrister Ken Archer said the outcome “truly serves the interests of justice”. “Some very senior people from law enforcement agencies, both federal and state, gave evidence in relation to Ramzi Jabbour’s character,” Mr Archer said. “[They said] that he was an officer of the highest integrity who has made significant contributions to our community. “The findings today vindicate that point of view. “He is an innocent man. He is a decent man.” Mr Jabbour’s solicitor, Michael Kukulies-Smith, derided the decision to bring the case against his client as “utter madness”. He said hundreds of thousands of taxpayers’ dollars had likely already been spent on the unsuccessful prosecution. “When the matter commenced, I described it as extraordinary that such trivial allegations were being pursued against such a distinguished senior police officer with over 30 years of experience,” Mr Kukulies-Smith told The Canberra Times. “Today, acquittals were entered and the taxpayer is left with the extraordinary bill run up by the ongoing pursuit of the matter.” Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content:
/images/transform/v1/crop/frm/37pQecASsxP5kZpQjfMrnhn/ae1d4371-e8a5-4973-ab79-737a76666b37.jpg/r10_141_3955_2370_w1200_h678_fmax.jpg
The prosecution of one of the country’s former top cops has been slammed as “utter madness” after he walked out of court “an innocent man”.
A magistrate’s decision to find Ramzi Jabbour not guilty on Friday marked the end of a prolonged legal battle for the ex-Australian Federal Police deputy commissioner, who was charged with gun possession and abuse of public office offences.
During a lengthy hearing in the ACT Magistrates Court, prosecutor David Jordan alleged Mr Jabbour had unlawfully possessed his AFP-issued pistol on the way to and from a location in NSW, where he allowed relatives to fire it at kangaroos.
The court heard two of Mr Jabbour’s relatives had discharged the Glock a combined nine times.
While “kangaroos were killed that day” in October 2018, it was unclear whether Mr Jabbour’s relatives, who were not police officers, or AFP personnel also on the trip had fired the fatal shots.
Mr Jordan alleged Mr Jabbour knew he should not have had the gun at the relevant time, saying he had returned it to his office safe at 4.30am the next day “to avoid scrutiny”.
The court also heard the senior officer had spoken of organising a “hunt”, and that he had later bought beer and gift cards for the subordinates who helped arrange the outing.
Ramzi Jabbour outside court during the early stages of his hearing last year. Picture: Blake Foden
But Magistrate James Stewart said on Friday the prosecution had failed to prove Mr Jabbour had been off-duty or that he had known exactly what was to happen on the trip, which was organised by the AFP.
Mr Stewart said kangaroos had previously been killed at the suppressed location in a permitted activity and Mr Jabbour may have been there in performance of his duties, allowing him to have the gun, despite the fact he was on leave at the time.
The magistrate also noted no charges were laid over the firing of Mr Jabbour’s gun, and the hearing was “not a royal commission” into the use of AFP weapons.
The other allegation against Mr Jabbour was that he had abused his public office by dishonestly obtaining a benefit for a relative.
The prosecution claimed Mr Jabbour had “induced” then-AFP legal officer Thomas McBride to provide “a steer” on the law of torts under the guise of it being for his own further studies, when it was actually intended to help with a child’s homework.
Mr Stewart found the request, emailed by Mr Jabbour at 4.18am, had clearly not arisen from the then-deputy commissioner’s AFP duties.
But in clearing Mr Jabbour, he found there was no evidence the man had exercised undue influence over Mr McBride or caused the legal officer’s professional workload to increase.
In light of the verdicts, Mr Stewart ordered the prosecution to pay Mr Jabbour’s legal costs.
Outside court, defence barrister Ken Archer said the outcome “truly serves the interests of justice”.
“[They said] that he was an officer of the highest integrity who has made significant contributions to our community.
“The findings today vindicate that point of view.
“He is an innocent man. He is a decent man.”
Mr Jabbour’s solicitor, Michael Kukulies-Smith, derided the decision to bring the case against his client as “utter madness”.
He said hundreds of thousands of taxpayers’ dollars had likely already been spent on the unsuccessful prosecution.
“When the matter commenced, I described it as extraordinary that such trivial allegations were being pursued against such a distinguished senior police officer with over 30 years of experience,” Mr Kukulies-Smith told The Canberra Times.
“Today, acquittals were entered and the taxpayer is left with the extraordinary bill run up by the ongoing pursuit of the matter.”
Our journalists work hard to provide local, up-to-date news to the community. This is how you can continue to access our trusted content:
