A former Canberra inmate says it felt like she was being “pack raped” when officers removed her from her cell before a strip search that she says breached her human rights.
Key points:
- Julianne Williams is suing Canberra’s jail over a body search and a strip search, saying her treatment at the prison was “cruel” and “degrading”
- Jail authorities maintain that the use of force was justified in both incidents because Ms Williams had threatened self-harm
- The main issue in the case is the difference in accounts of how the strip search was carried out
The ACT Supreme Court heard the strip search was carried out on January 11, 2021, when officers became concerned that 37-year-old Indigenous woman Julianne Williams might harm herself after she became distressed about not being allowed to attend her grandmother’s funeral.
Ms Williams is suing Canberra’s only jail, the Alexander Maconochie Centre (AMC) over the strip search, saying her treatment at the prison was “cruel”, “degrading” and a breach of the Human Rights Act.
She described how she was removed from her cell by five female officers, who jumped on her.
She told the court it felt like she was being “pack-raped”.
“I was not kicking and biting to hurt anyone, I was in survival mode,” she said.
The court heard Ms Williams initially underwent a body search, to which she did not consent, in her cell, before she was taken to another unit within the jail where she did consent to a strip search.
That search took place in a bathroom with two female officers.
But Ms Williams is alleging there were breaches of the Human Rights Act in both searches.
Lawyers for the jail told the court that, in context, the use of force was justified in both incidents because prison officers feared Ms Williams was going to hurt herself.
‘It happened’
Ms Williams has been distressed through much of the hearing, as barrister Houda Younan quizzed her about how events unfolded.
The jail authorities maintain that Ms Williams had threatened self-harm, including ripping out her pacemaker.
But the main issue in the case is the difference in accounts of the strip search.
“Is it your evidence you stood there naked?” Ms Younan asked Ms Williams.
“Yes,” Ms Williams replied.
“I am going to suggest to you that never happened,” Ms Younan said.
“Suggest all you like, it happened,” Ms Williams replied.
Ms Williams said the officers did not use the usual practice for a strip search, which involved asking a detainee to remove only either the top half or the bottom half of their clothing at a time.
But Ms Younan produced an injury claim Ms Williams had lodged over the incident, which suggested she had removed her clothes on only half of her body at a time — seemingly going against her claim that she was made to strip completely naked.
Ms Williams agreed she had signed the document but said someone else had written the report, and the information was wrong.
Ms Williams also clashed with Ms Younan over her suggestions regarding the allegation she was made to “squat and cough” — a technique used to check body cavities for drugs.
Ms Williams told the court “it happened” but Ms Younan said officers at the jail were ordered to cease using the squat-and-cough technique in 2019.
The hearing is expected to run for the rest of the week as the court waits to hear evidence from medical staff, corrections officers and jail management.