Use of force by a police officer who intervened in a petrol forecourt arrest in the Waitaki district was ‘justified’ but he breached policy as he was off-duty, an independent investigation has found.

‘Mr Z’ complained about his treatment at the hands of police following the incident which took place on February 7, 2024 in a “small rural community” in the district.

That day Mr Z was tailed by a marked police car driven by on-duty officer (Officer B) and an off-duty officer (Officer A) in a private car, with Officer A saying he recognised the Nissan Sentra Mr Z was driving with its “distinctive spoiler” from footage of burnouts on the local golf course six days before.

As he was off duty, Officer A had asked Officer B to stop the car after it was spotted, the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) ruling said.

Mr Z pulled into a petrol forecourt and Officer B got out and started speaking to the complainant.

Officer A then took over and told Mr Z he was wanted for doing burnouts at the golf course, with Mr Z protesting and telling the officers had had only just bought the car from its previous owner so it could not be him.

A scuffle ensued during which Officer A placed a hand on Mr Z’s chest, pushed him backwards and grabbed his arm, taking him to the ground and putting his knee on his back while Officer B put handcuffs on him, the document said.

Mr Z was arrested and charged with threatening behaviour and resisting police — he was convicted of those charges in April this year.

Mr Z said he was given the car by a friend the same day in exchange for driving him home, the IPCA’s report said.

He successfully appealed the decision to impound his car given he had only just got it.

Police maintained they had legal grounds to impound the vehicle but were satisfied with Mr Z’s account and agreed to pay the impound fees.

Mr Z separately complained to the IPCA about the decision to impound his car and Officer A’s use of force.

His complaint was that Officer A took over from Officer B, that Officer A was not in uniform and did not identify himself as a police officer, that he had no right to impound the car, assaulted him injuring his face and that he intentionally stood on his glasses and broke them. 

Officer A said he did identify himself as a police officer and showed Mr Z his police ID card.

"Officer A’s evidence is inconsistent with the terms of Mr Z’s complaint.

"We prefer Officer A’s version of events. This is supported by the CCTV footage ... in which Officer A shows Mr Z something early on in their interaction, more likely than not his ID card.”

The IPCA found that Officer A was justified in deciding to impound Mr Z’s car and in his use of force to restrain and handcuff Mr Z.

However, his off-duty intervention breached policy.

Police carried out their own investigation and concluded the officers acted lawfully.

Southern District Commander Superintendent Jason Guthrie said they acknowledged the IPCA findings and learnings had been taken from the event.

Rural officers operated in “complex environments” and had “minimal close support” most of the time.

“Anti-social road user behaviour causes significant distress and damage in our communities, and in this case, our officer intended to hold an alleged offender accountable for their actions.

“While the officer was justified in impounding a vehicle that had caused damage to a local golf course, and in restraining and handcuffing the suspect, we acknowledge and accept the authority's finding that the officer breached policy in doing so.

“Learnings have been taken from this event, but it is important to note that rural officers operate in complex environments, most of the time with minimal close support.

"It is accepted the off-duty intervention was in this case technically a breach of policy, however the intervention evolved from unexpected circumstances, and the officers' actions were in good faith to apprehend and hold an alleged offender to account.”

The IPCA published its ruling this week — more than two years after the incident — following Mr Z’s conviction.