How ordinary police misconduct threatens public trust
While headlines this week focus on scandals at the very top of the New Zealand Police, the more routine abuses of power, the ones that happen every day, are just as damaging, if not more so. These are the cases that rarely make it into the news cycle: officers writing misleading “statements of facts” that should be in my opinion called summaries of allegations, handcuffing or bashing people without justification, failing to provide proper care to vulnerable detainees, or seizing property without following the law. Each of these incidents might seem small in isolation, but collectively they reveal a pattern of systemic issues that affect ordinary New Zealanders.
It is these day-to-day decisions, the punches in custody cells, the unlawful arrests, the failure to monitor vulnerable individuals, that often slip under the radar, escaping scrutiny and accountability. The Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) is supposed to provide oversight, however in many of these cases, their findings show a worrying reluctance or inability to hold officers fully to account. Behind every report is a person who has been harmed, a family left questioning the integrity of those sworn to protect them, and a public left with diminishing trust in institutions meant to serve justice.
The following cases, all reviewed by the IPCA, illustrate the consequences of these smaller, but no less serious, abuses of police power.
Police use of force against youths unjustified - 4 February 2025
A report by the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) examined police use of force against five youths aged 10 to 14 during the interception of a stolen vehicle in south‑east Auckland on 26 September 2022. While the arrests themselves were legally justified, the IPCA found that Officer A struck a 14‑year‑old multiple times to the back of the head and back while face‑down, and Officer B used excessive force against a 10‑year‑old, including kicking or pushing, whereas the force used on the driver, one rear passenger, and Officer C’s actions with an 11‑year‑old were reasonable. Footage and family accounts confirmed injuries consistent with these findings. The report emphasises that police must exercise particular care with children, ensuring any force is proportionate and justified, even in high‑risk situations. Officer A was charged with common assault, pleaded guilty, and was discharged without conviction, illustrating accountability, while the IPCA highlighted the importance of policy, training, and independent oversight to prevent similar incidents and protect the rights of young people.
Senior officer unlawfully disciplined his children with a belt - 20 February 2025
A senior officer of the New Zealand Police (referred to as “Officer A”), who served as officer‑in‑charge at a North Island station, admitted to physically disciplining three of his children by striking them with a webbing belt on two occasions (once against his two daughters, aged under 10 and in their early teens, and once against a son under 10) in response to misconduct. Preliminary investigations by the police and Oranga Tamariki found the children were not at ongoing risk and abandoned further evidential interviews after the parents declined permission, and Officer A declined to make a formal police statement, meaning the criminal investigation was discontinued for insufficient admissible evidence. The IPCA concluded that because Officer A’s belt discipline was for corrective purposes, he could not invoke the lawful “reasonable force” defence under section 59 of the Crimes Act, and therefore his actions “constituted three offences of assault on a child.” The officer was not criminally charged, but the police applied employment sanctions.
Concern that Police failed to discharge their duty of care to man in custody - 4th March 2025
Taranaki Fuimaono died in the custody unit of New Zealand Police after being discharged from hospital on 12 June 2021 and taken into police detention at the Auckland Custody Unit, where he was placed on two‑hourly checks despite having recently been treated for serious medical issues including an induced coma and drug involvement. The IPCA found that police did not adequately assess his vulnerability or monitoring needs, and failed to recognise clear signs of his deteriorating condition (such as loud snoring, laboured breathing and drowsiness) which, had they been properly addressed, may have resulted in more frequent monitoring and earlier medical intervention. While the medical experts concluded that his death — determined to be caused by a combination of obesity, hypertension, obstructive sleep apnoea and drug use - may have been unavoidable regardless of location or timing, the IPCA emphasised that police breached their duty of care by not responding more promptly to his changed state.
Woman dies in Police custody in Gisborne - 25 March 2025
On 22 November 2023, after being convicted of murder, 63‑year‑old Lynne Martin was remanded overnight in Gisborne Police Station while awaiting transfer to a corrections facility. Despite her serious conviction, known poor health and history of depression and suicide attempt, her Electronic Custody Module assessment classified her as only needing two‑hourly checks. Staffing on the late shift was inadequate, and two officers failed to carry out the requisite physical checks, recording instead false entries in the system. At around 7.20 am the next morning she was found deceased in her cell, likely by suicide. The IPCA found that while initial care was in line with policy, Police officers did not appropriately factor Ms Martin’s broader circumstances and did not undertake required supervision - thereby breaching their duty of care.
Arrest and use of force against two men in Auckland unjustified - 3rd April 2025
Here’s a one‑paragraph summary of the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) report released 3 April 2025 concerning two men in Auckland: On 25 September 2022 at around 6 am, five officers responded to an incident on Hobson Street, Auckland, when two bystanders - identified as “Mr Z” and his cousin “Mr X” - began filming. Officer A (and later Officer B) warned Mr Z about interfering, then pushed him, after which Mr Z was arrested for obstruction; Mr X was then also arrested when he began filming. Both were handcuffed and held in a police van and later at the custody suite, but ultimately released without charge. The IPCA found that the officers were not justified in pushing the men, that the arrests were unlawful, and that the force used was therefore unjustified, also noting inadequate care of the men’s phones while in custody.
Use of Police vehicle as a weapon and punching in Whitianga unjustified - 8 April 2025
On 9 March 2023, two police officers attended an apartment complex in Whitianga in relation to a family‑harm and aggravated robbery matter. One officer arrived by patrol car while the other approached on foot. When the known suspect (Mr X) struck the windscreen and driver’s window with a skateboard - injuring glass shards in the officer’s eye - the officer initially drove away but then reversed course and deliberately rammed the suspect with his police vehicle, launching him between the car and a fence. The officer then exited his vehicle and punched Mr X seven times in the head area. The IPCA found that while the ramming was in “defence” of the officer and colleague, the use of force was disproportionate and therefore unjustified, and the subsequent punches were also unjustified because the officer did not genuinely believe Mr X posed a continuing threat.
Police breach policy during fatal fleeing driver incident at Manukau - 10 April 2025
On 17 June 2024, Police stopped a car in Manukau because its number plates had been reported stolen; when the driver (Mr Z) accelerated away and failed to stop, officers followed without switching off their emergency lights and thus effectively continued a pursuit despite deciding not to. Meanwhile another unit attempted to deploy road spikes without informing the Police Emergency Communications Centre of their position or plan; as one officer stepped from behind cover, Mr Z swerved, lost control and crashed into a tree, killing himself and seriously injuring his passenger. The IPCA found that although the driver’s offending and drug use were contributing factors, Police breached both “Fleeing Driver” and “Tyre Deflation Devices” policy and that their actions played a part in the fatal crash - though there was insufficient evidence to recommend criminal charges against the officers.
Fatal crash following Police pursuit near Otaki - 15 April 2025
On 26 April 2024, police briefly pursued a stolen ute south of Levin on State Highway 1 after it was involved in an aggravated robbery in Ōtaki. The pursuit was abandoned due to the vehicle’s high speed. The ute later drove north in the southbound lane and crashed head-on into a Toyota Fortuner SUV north of Ōtaki, killing driver 16-year-old Reihana Hawea at the scene and a passenger, Tama Whakarau, later in hospital. Other occupants of both vehicles sustained serious to moderate injuries. The IPCA found that the initial decision to pursue was justified, but there were minor policy breaches, including a crew member in the lead vehicle managing radio communications when they should not have, an officer re-engaging hazard lights without approval, and the failure of other officers to intervene when the vehicle entered the wrong lane. The report recommended clarifying responsibilities in the fleeing-driver policy for communications and re-engagement after abandonment.
Custody officer uses unjustified force in Manukau Custody Unit - 17 April 2025
On 17 April 2025 the Independent Police Conduct Authority reported that a custody officer at the New Zealand Police’s Manukau Custody Unit used unjustified force on a 19‑year‑old male detainee who had begun repeatedly banging his head against a wall. IPCA The officer entered the cell alone despite no immediate threat to the detainee and struck him twice during the extraction process, which the Authority deemed unreasonable and excessive. Although the officer was justified in using force to stop what he believed was imminent spitting, the punch to the face was deemed excessive. The Authority found there was insufficient evidence for criminal charges but recommended that Police consider disciplinary action.
Wrongful arrest of man in Westgate - 1 May 2025
On 23 May 2024 in Westgate, a man identified as “Mr Z” was wrongfully arrested by officers who believed he was another person suspected of starting a fire. They lacked the legally required “good cause to suspect” that Mr Z himself had committed arson, making the arrest unlawful. Although the ensuing struggle with the officers included handcuffing, the Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) found the force used was not excessive and rejected the claim that the officer deliberately grabbed Mr Z’s genitals, concluding any contact was likely inadvertent during a pocket search.
Wellington Police seize property for non-payment of fines in manner contrary to law - 8 May 2025
The IPCA reviewed four complaints from 2022‑23 about Police in the Wellington district obtaining warrants and seizing vehicles for unpaid fines under the guise of Operation Cobalt, which targeted gang‑related offending. In three of the four cases the officers failed to comply with legal requirements under the Summary Proceedings Act 1957, including failing to demand payment of the fine prior to seizure, and in doing so rendered the vehicle seizures unlawful. The report found that Police at the time lacked policy guidance about how to execute these warrants outside of the Operation Cobalt context and recommended that if officers are to execute seizure warrants without bailiffs they must receive specific training in the legal requirements; it also pointed out it was unreasonable to execute warrants in the early hours of the morning in some cases.
Use of force in Auckland Custody Unit not justified- 21 August 2025
On 18 January 2023 a detainee referred to as Mr X was lawfully arrested for breaching bail. The Independent Police Conduct Authority found that when he was transferred into a new cell, staff used unjustified force even though Mr X was compliant. Officers applied a wrist lock, lifted his legs causing him to fall head‑first onto a concrete cell bed, and restrained him on the floor. They failed to choose a dry cell when one was available and did not seek medical advice after his head impact. The report also found that the standard of care while he was in custody was below acceptable levels, including withholding a mattress and blanket from Mr X for several hours.
Officers exceed authority in removing car keys in Hamilton -28 August 2025
On 17 September 2023, at about 3.00 am, two officers from New Zealand Police in Hamilton approached a 17‑year‑old male who was seated in the driver’s seat of a car. The officers asked for his name and address under s 114 of the Land Transport Act 1998 and he complied, handing over his driver’s licence. As he became increasingly abusive the second officer reached in and took the car keys which were on the console or driver seat. A struggle followed and the youth was arrested for assaulting and resisting police, and also for possession of a knife found in the vehicle. The Independent Police Conduct Authority found that while the interaction and subsequent arrest were lawful, the officers were not justified in relying on s 121 of the Land Transport Act to lawfully seize the keys because the threshold of believing the driver was incapable of having proper control was not met.
These cases illustrate a troubling pattern of small-scale abuses of power that often go unpunished or unnoticed. While large-scale corruption and scandals at the top of the police hierarchy grab headlines, the day-to-day decisions by officers in custody suites, on the streets, or in handling property can have devastating consequences for individuals and families.
It raises serious questions about the culture within New Zealand Police, the independence of oversight bodies like the IPCA, and whether officers are sufficiently trained and accountable for the most basic duties of care and lawful conduct. Real reform requires scrutiny not just at the top, but also in these everyday interactions that shape public trust and safety.
