How Did Cameron Doomadgee's Death Have An Impact On Indigenous Society?

Since early colonisation, relations between indigenous and non-indigenous communities have been the cause of much tension within Australia. Historically, relations between indigenous communities and the police have been particularly volatile and unstable, and with the death of indigenous man Cameron Doomadgee in police custody in November 2004, this relationship only suffered more. Drawing from various resources, this paper will critically analyse the factors surrounding the death itself, and both the legal and social implications of the incident in order to gain and understanding as to the impact Cameron Doomadgee’s death had on indigenous/police relations within Australia.
On November 19, 2004, Indigenous man Cameron Doomadgee (Mulrunji)

died in a Palm Island holding cell in the custody of the Queensland Police Service (QPS). Mulrunji was picked up by police on the morning of Friday, November 19 for causing a public disturbance. He was taken to the police watchouse in Palm Island, an aboriginal community which lies off the northeast coast of Queensland, home to approximately 3000 residents, almost all of whom are indigenous (Keenan, 2009). On the morning of November 19, Mulrunji, a 36 year old man on his way to go fishing, passed Chris Hurley, a police officer, and Lloyd Bengaroo, a police liaison officer as they were arresting a young man, Patrick Bramwell, for causing a public disturbance. The exact details of what occurred in the moments immediately following this is subject to competing claims by the parties involved. A violent altercation occurred between Hurley and Mulrunji, and Mulrunji was taken into the watchouse. Less than an hour later, he lay dead on the floor of the holding cell. According to Campbell (2011) a notification was made internally of the death to Senior Sergeant Chris Hurley’s direct supervisor (District Inspector Gregory Strohfeldt). Despite various conflicts with the Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody’s (RCIADIC) recommendations, the death was initially handled by a close friend of Hurley’s – Detective Sergeant Robinson, the officer in charge of the Criminal Investigation Branch (CIB). Over the course of the next several days, the detectives in charge of the investigation came to the conclusion that the death was an accident, and that Mulrunji fell on the stairs leading into the police station, ultimately causing his death (Keenan, 2009). These reported versions of events drew a media frenzy, and sparked outrage in the indigenous community, leading to riots across Palm Island, ultimately resulting in the controversial arrest of Lex Wotton for rioting with destruction (Hart, 2009). These events called into question the effectiveness of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal deaths in Custody.
On 10 August, 1987, Prime Minister Bob Hawke announced the formation of a Royal Commission whose aim was to investigate the causes of death of Indigenous people held within jails in Australia. Established in response to the public concern that these deaths were not given the explanation they deserved, the Commission examined all deaths that occurred in custody in each state and territory between 1 January 1980 and 31 May 1989. In their research, The Royal Commission found that, although the rate of Indigenous deaths in custody did not exceed the non-Indigenous rate, the number of Indigenous deaths in custody reflects the over-representation of Indigenous people in custody (RCIADIC, 1991). In response to their findings, the RCIADIC created a list of recommendations concerning the process police departments should take following a death in custody. Recommendation 32, for example, states an officer at the rank of Chief Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner, or Chief Commissioner must be the one to appoint an officer in charge of the investigation, whereas in this case, it was a Regional Crime Coordinator. Furthermore, Recommendation 34 states that only officers who are highly qualified should conduct any investigation into a death in custody, however in this particular case, the investigators in question were chosen due to the fact that they were located close to Palm Island. The RCIADIC has stated that complying with these recommendations is crucial in preserving evidence, especially in the earliest stages of investigation, and as a result, the blatant disregard of these recommendations by QPS meant the investigation was unreliable from the start.
The death of Mulrunji was the first death in police custody to be investigated under the Coroner’s Act 2003 (Qld) passed the previous year, which was designed to implement the various recommendations proposed by the RCIADIC (Hart, 2009).

A post-mortem coronial report conducted on 24 November, 2004 concluded that Mulrunji’s death was the result of abdominal haemorrhaging, a consequence of a ruptured liver and portal vein (Campbell, 2011). He was also reported to have a cut above his right eye. Both coronial inquiries criticised the actions of the QPS and the way in which the investigation was handled, with particular regard for the choice of investigative officers (Keenan, 2009). The report further went on to find an inappropriate use of police discretion, and that Senior Sergeant Chris Hurley had lied about his actions in treating Mulrunji. In September of 2006, another coronial report conducted by the Acting State Coroner of Queensland, Christine Clements, reported that the fatal injuries Mulrunji suffered were a result of a number of punches delivered by Senior Sergeant Chris Hurley (Hart, 2009). This report was met with mixed reactions from the community and the police. Palm Island residents were reportedly relieved and elated with the news with the hope of finally receiving justice for Mulrunji’s death, while the QPS were outraged. According to an interview the ABC conducted with the then-president of the Queensland Police Union (QPU) Gary Wilkinson, he stated Clements

“deliberately overlooked evidence that would support an alternative finding” (Hart, 2009). After an arduous political battle, Hurley was eventually charged with manslaughter in February 2007, becoming the first police officer in Australian history to be charged with an indigenous death in custody (Keenan, 2009). Once again, this was met with much opposition by the QPS, who threatened to strike, and launched a public campaign to clear Hurley’s name of any wrongdoing (Keenan, 2009). Hurley’s legal team submitted an application, referring to 50(d) of the recently implemented Coroner’s Act, which stated that the court may set aside a finding if it “could not be reasonably supported by the evidence” (Hart, 2009). As a result, Clement’s findings were dismissed, with the reasoning behind the dismissal being “the hypothesis the fatal injury occurred as a result of the fall cannot be excluded.” This has precedent within the criminal law, as only what’s proven beyond reasonable doubt can be used in the conviction of a crime. After standing trial in June of 2007 in Townsville, the jury rendered a verdict of not guilty on all charges (Hart, 2009). Later, in 2008, Hurley won an appeal which included an order that the costs of his appeal be paid in its entirety by the Doomadgee family. However, in 2009, the Court of Appeal partially overturned the decision, ordering indemnity certificates to both parties (Hurley v Clements & Ors (No 2), 2009). As Keenan (2009) argues, the complete lack of justice that all the investigations and legal proceedings have failed to bring to Mulrunji’s family must cast doubt over the entire process regarding police investigations into deaths that occur in their custody, and may stem from endemic discrimination found in Australian society.
In recognising indigenous rights, the Australian government is attempting to abate the perception of a discriminatory culture.

While the legal system has taken positive steps forward in that it grants indigenous land rights and prohibits racial discrimination via legislation, it is also responsible for incarceration rates of indigenous Australians over 15 times that of non-indigenous Australians. Even though Indigenous people comprise less than 2.5 percent of the total population of Australia, they account for one-third of people involved in custody related incidents (Lyneham, Joudo-Larsen and Beacroft, 2010). In 2008-09, 15 indigenous people died in prisons in Australia, while in 2010-11 that number rose to 21 – the highest on record (AIC). However, it should be noted the trend regarding indigenous deaths in custody is becoming less and less prevalent, and the National Deaths in Custody Program Monitoring Report indicated that that overall custody related incidents have decreased over the past decade. An example of the government recognising indigenous rights occurred in 1986, when the Queensland government relinquished control of Palm Island to the newly formed community council, recognising their right to self-government. While some may view this as a positive movement for indigenous and non-indigenous relations, it is important to recognise the consequences of this action. Following the relinquishment of control, the government swiftly withdrew infrastructure from the

island (Keenan, 2009). In addition, the isolation of Palm Island coupled with the fact that many of the residents are either former reserve inmates or children of them made it extremely difficult to draw interest to the island. With unemployment at over 85%, domestic violence and suicide rates that are disproportionately higher than the rest of mainland Australia, and the severe overcrowding of homes, the lack of government support means the island struggles to sustain itself. As such, it is clear that simply the recognition of the self-governing and land owning rights of indigenous Australians is not enough. Perhaps anti-discrimination legislation indirectly propels the message that the government has ‘done its part’ and that inherit racism is tied only to individuals, and not the state itself. Anti-discrimination legislation often gives the wider, non-indigenous community the idea that discrimination isn’t present in Australia anymore, simply because the act of discrimination is unlawful, and dealt with by the police if it occurs (Keenan, 2009). Therefore, in order to truly quell the prejudice the indigenous population faces, the non-indigenous community at large may need a greater understanding of the level to which indigenous people are targeted, not only at the individual level, but the systemic level as well.
The death of Mulrunji had an astute impact on indigenous/police relations across the whole of Australia, but effects were felt particularly in Queensland. Immediately following the riots that broke out as a result of Mulrunji’s death, QPS stated that their relations with the indigenous people had effectively broken down (Crime and Misconduct Commission, 2009). While police departments were determined in their support for Hurley, local indigenous communities felt a disdain towards police, with many calling for a Fitzgerald-type inquiry into the corruption in the QPS. The CMC stated in their 2009 report that tensions between the indigenous community and police on Palm Island had settled slightly, though many still feel uneasy. The CMC promotes the idea of building relations based on trust and confidence. Actively engaging in indigenous communities is an effective way of building relations and closing the rift that the death of Mulrunji created.

references
(Hurley v Clements & Ors (No 2) [2009] QCA207).