A high-ranking Northern Territory police officer has been found not guilty of disseminating confidential COVID-19 information in a group chat at the height of the pandemic last year.
Key points:
-
Jeannie Secrett pleaded not guilty to the charges in June
-
The court heard she shared police information in a group chat
-
The case boiled down to whether that information was confidential
Jeannie Secrett, one of the few fingerprint experts in the territory who has worked with the NT Police Force for over two decades, appeared at the Darwin Local Court on Friday afternoon, supported by family and friends.
After pleading not guilty to two counts of disclosing confidential information in June — each of which carry a maximum penalty of three years imprisonment — in a lengthy hearing today she was acquitted of both charges.
In handing down her decision, local court Judge Therese Austin said there were no disputes over the majority of the particulars of the case, including that the officer shared police information.
Instead, she said the legal battle boiled down to whether or not the nature of the information disclosed was “actually confidential” information.
And that, the judge said, was “hotly disputed”, and complicated further by the fact that confidential information is not defined in the NT’s criminal code.
The court heard that on two separate occasions Ms Secrett shared an internal broadcast notice about COVID-19 directions regarding workers entering high-risk areas, and a police gazette about the reinstatement of retired officers who had refused a vaccine.
Those documents were shared in a group chat on Signal, with the members including current and former police officers, plus some members of the general public.
The court heard that NT Police does treat the information on its database as confidential and that Ms Secrett had said she did not know the documents were restricted.
In handing down her sentence, Judge Austin said that while Ms Secrett’s conduct was “inappropriate”, prosecuting lawyer Camille McKay had failed to prove the case.
“In accessing her work computer, emails and broadcast intended for police members and employees only, and then publishing that information to people not employed by the NTPFES, Ms Secrett acted in the very least inappropriately,” Judge Austin said.
“And at the most … in flagrant disregard of her obligations as a serving police officer.”
However, she said it was “inarguable and uncontroversial” to find that the COVID-19 directions from the chief health officer were already in the public arena when Ms Secrett shared the information in the group chat.
She added that at the time the direction was to spread the information far and wide.
In the case of disseminating the gazette, Judge Austin said that knowledge of dismissals and reinstatements of officers due to COVID-19 vaccines was common knowledge and “in the public arena regardless of whether or not the police wanted to treat that as confidential”.
“I find the prosecution case falls short at proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the information in the gazettal notice is confidential information,” Judge Austin said.
“Further, the crown has failed to negate the fault element regarding the defendant’s knowledge,” Judge Austin said.
The crown has been ordered to pay costs.