A prosecutor has told a jury that a murder-accused policeman was gung ho when he fatally shot an Aboriginal teen and his made-up evidence is extremely damaging.

March 9, 2022

A murder-accused policeman’s “made up” evidence about the moments before he fatally shot an Aboriginal teenager damages his credibility, a jury has been told.

Constable Zachary Rolfe lied to justify the unjustifiable and knew he had been to gung ho when he fired his final two rounds into Kumanjayi Walker, prosecutor Philip Strickland SC says.

Rolfe, 30, has denied murdering the 19-year-old as he resisted arrest in Yuendumu, 290km northwest of Alice Springs on November 9, 2019.

Th constable told the jury he pulled the trigger after Mr Walker reached for his police pistol and stabbed his partner Sergeant Adam Eberl, then a constable, in the neck and chest.

But Mr Strickland said on Wednesday that testimony was a major problem for Rolfe.

He said police body-worn camera footage does not support the claim and it was contradicted by Sgt Eberl, who told the jury he had trapped the teen’s arm at the same time.

“The evidence that Kumanjayi’s left hand is on the Glock (pistol) is a lie,” Mr Strickland told the jury during his closing address to the Northern Territory Supreme Court.

He also highlighted how Rolfe had not alerted Sgt Eberl to Mr Walker’s hand being on his gun.

“He goes back to the police station and never tells (Sergeant Julie) Frost that (Walker) went for his gun … does not tell any other officers,” Mr Strickland said.

“There is an obvious explanation why he does not say ‘gun’ at the time … and that is because that never happened.

“He made it up.”

Mr Strickland told the jury that if it accepted the lie about Mr Walker’s hand being on his gun it was “extremely damaging to the assessment of (Rolfe’s) credibility” that he also believed Sgt Eberl’s life was in danger and that he was being stabbed in the chest and neck.

“The Crown says he did not see (Walker) stabbing Eberl,” he said.

“He did not see (Walker’s) upper body move in those three seconds. He knew that, at that stage, there was no longer an imminent threat to Eberl’s life.”

He said Rolfe knew Sgt Eberl was “effectively restraining” Mr Walker when the pair fell to the ground and that is why he fired shots two and three.

“He would not have taken those two shots if he believed there was a risk of accidentally shooting Eberl,” he said.

“He was confident that there would not be this split-second flipping of positions.”

He reminded the court that Sgt Eberl was not actually stabbed during the incident before moving to Rolfe’s statement to his partner after he had shot the teen: “It is all good. He was stabbing me, he was stabbing you”.

“It was a lie to justify the unjustifiable. He was saying it because he knew he had gone too far. He knew he had been too gung ho,” Mr Strickland said.

He also questioned why Rolfe had gone into a dark home in search of the teen.

“It was because he wanted to arrest (Walker) there and then,” he said.

“He did not want to cordon and contain. He did not want to negotiate a surrender.”

The Crown concedes the first shot, fired after Mr Walker had stabbed the constable in the shoulder with scissors and while he was standing and wrestling with Sgt Eberl, was justified.

But it says when Rolfe fired the second and third shots, which are the subject of the murder charge, he did not believe Sgt Eberl was at risk of serious harm or death.

“The accused’s response in firing those two fatal shots, at point blank range, was not a reasonable response as he perceived it,” Mr Strickland said.