Queensland police have ruled the shredding of a young woman’s rape statement was “a misunderstanding”, after an internal investigation conducted by the same detective unit that failed to act on her initial complaint.

The detective who shredded the statement was recorded saying he destroyed the document “in front of my boss”. The internal police inquiry was then carried out by the same detective’s “officer in charge”.

Guardian Australia revealed this month that police destroyed the complaint made by a 26-year-old woman known as Lyla.* She has now contacted the state’s Crime and Corruption Commission about what she calls the “deeply concerning” internal investigation.

Immediately after Lyla’s story was published, the Queensland police service said the matter had been passed to its ethical standards command.

Lyla was then contacted by the “officer in charge” of detectives at the station where the statement was shredded. Lyla also recorded this conversation.

The senior detective said he had been asked by ethical standards to conduct an “independent” investigation into the situation. He said he had not listened to the recording Lyla made of the conversation with the subordinate detective.

Lyla recalls him saying that he spoke to the detective who shredded the statement, and had concluded the situation was a misunderstanding. He gave the subordinate officer advice about how he could have better handled the situation.

Lyla said the senior detective “tried to put words in my mouth” by repeatedly suggesting that she was now happy to accept the results of his investigation.

Police failed to log statement for more than four weeks

Lyla made her rape complaint in Victoria, where she moved late last year. The statement was then sent to Queensland police, who took no action for more than four weeks.

They did not log the case in the police database, or assign a reference number. Lyla never heard from police and subsequently withdrew the complaint because, she said, she was suffering anxiety attacks.



When she withdrew, the detective assigned to the case made the decision to shred the statement rather than to create a file and keep it on record.

The case has also raised broader questions about how complaints against Queensland police are handled. The ethical standards command has an investigative unit, but “minor matters” are investigated by local commands, the police website says.

The police commissioner, Ian Stewart, declined to respond when asked why the woman’s matter was passed back to the local command, rather than investigated as a potential breach of the public records act.

The destruction of public records in Queensland carries a $21,000 fine. The state archivist gives police the ability to destroy documents under a retention schedule, which mandates that records relating to sexual assault cases be kept for 70 years.

“As the matter is under review no comment can be made at this time,” police said in a statement.



Lyla has contacted the state’s Crime and Corruption Commission about the internal investigation. She said if police were not willing to assess potential breaches of the Public Records Act, an independent body should investigate.

“[My former partner] sexually assaulted me, hit me, hurt me, and was the motivation of why I made one serious and nearly fatal attempt of ending my life,” she said.



“The detectives in question then recommended the case be closed instead of offering to investigate the sexual crimes and violence. They’ve whitewashed the investigation.”

Lyla was told by the senior detective he was contacting her only in relation to the police discipline complaint, and that she would have to return to a Victorian police station to make a new rape complaint if she wanted the matter investigated.

Spotlight on internal complaints

Two serving police officers who spoke anonymously to Guardian Australia said misconduct complaints were rarely investigated by the ethical standards command. “An overwhelming number” were deemed minor and handed back to local commands.

They said that in cases where ethical standards did investigate, officers suspected of misconduct were often given the opportunity to respond during the investigation, rather than afterwards.

“They’ll send an email saying: this is the claim, now come back with a response. You don’t investigate a crime by sending an email to the criminal to outline the case against him and ask if he did it,” one officer said.

“They can still be fair in the process by investigating first. But this way police [officers] speak to the union or a boss, they put a response together and more often than not, the complaint goes away or [the officer will] get a talking to.”

Guardian Australia recently reported that Queensland police investigated 59 complaints of computer hacking by officers over a 13-month period. In 52 of those cases, no disciplinary action was taken. Two officers who were found to have improperly accessed the police database were dealt with by “chastisement”.

In a statement, Queensland police said it had recently implemented a statewide trial of a “remedially based” discipline system and that “management strategies will be undertaken to address inappropriate conduct even in circumstances where sanctions may be imposed”.

“Where areas for improvement are identified, swift action will be taken at a local level to correct the behaviour and prevent a repeat of the conduct through management intervention strategies. The authority to impose sanctions will be maintained to address conduct which is serious, repeated or detrimental to the reputation of the service.”

* Lyla is a pseudonym to protect the victim’s identity

• In Australia, the national rape and domestic violence hotline is 1800 RESPECT (737 732) and the crisis support service Lifeline is on 13 11 14. In the UK, Samaritans can be contacted on 116 123. In the US, the suicide prevention lifeline is 1-800-273-8255. Other international helplines can be found at www.befrienders.org