 Commissioner Stewart has asked me to make some comments today following the sentencing of a suspended officer. Commissioner Stewart said that now that the court matter was finalised the QPS would seek the court transcripts and continue with internal QPS processes which will include amongst other matters consideration of this officer's suitability to remain as an officer of the QPS. This incident was identified by the QPS and an internal investigation into the conduct of the officer led to charges being laid. Commissioner Stewart said and I quote for obvious reasons I cannot comment on the specifics of this matter which may ultimately find itself before one of the deputy commissioners for consideration. Commissioner went on to make the following comments. I would like to thank the investigating officers who work quickly to bring this matter to court. Their work on this case embodies the QPS commitment to ethical lawful conduct. As soon as the behaviour was identified the matter was investigated the man was charged and he was suspended from active duty. The QPS has extensive protocols in place around the seizure of drugs and money and those protocols are constantly scrutinised both by senior officers and external agencies. However this case highlights that we can never ever be complacent about the work we do or how we do it. The expectation of the professional standards required by our police officers to maintain are clearly known. Integrity is a key aspect of those standards. Above all we expect honesty from our officers and believe that you do as well. The community is entitled to trust its police officers to do the right thing. Dishonesty simply has no place within the Queensland Police Service. It erodes community confidence, it erodes office of morale. This suspended officers actions have been dealt with by the court and those actions sadly reflect on the excellent work done each and every day by his fellow officers. Thank you. So is there a chance that this officer could get his job back or something back in the QPS? What will happen from this point is that the QPS has processes for dealing with this situation. We will examine all of the information that's been placed before the court and we will continue with our investigation of the officer's suitability to be an officer and we will do that as soon as we can. In the meantime the officer will remain suspended with our pay until a determination is made. How long will that be? Look we'll get it done as soon as we can but we are obviously in the hands of the courts in terms of getting hold of the transcript and then we'll have to examine the medical evidence that's been provided by this officer perhaps conduct our own medical examination and then we'll come to a view about the future of the officer. In court case today they heard some pretty damning things about the Queensland Police Service and the fact that they were saying that there was sort of a culture of them that they didn't accept human frailty or mental illness and this person had struggled with bipolar and tried to conceal it for a number of years. Is that the case? Is that sort of culture don't be the weak link? No look I'd totally reject that. This officer has been a high-performing and valued member of this organization for 20 years. I know this officer personally and for anyone who knows this officer would be very surprised to find that he has struggled with this mental illness over the period of the last few years as was indicated in court today. I'm not disputing the fact that that is the case but he has been a high performing and valuable member of the organization and this mental illness has been kept totally secret and wasn't known to any of us. So that's the point that they were making that he was trying to keep it concealed because he didn't want to be seen as the weak person in the team. No look... Is that culture sort of the way you show that you're tough for? Within State Crime Operations Command where this officer worked we have mandatory psychological testing of all officers who go into the command. That officer underwent that testing and that revealed no issues. On top of that officers who work in specialist squad such as Task Force Argos are subject to more rigorous annual testing. So we take the issue of the mental health of our officers very seriously. On top of that we have a very strong support network. We have peer support officers who are their colleagues. We have human services officers who are trained psychologists and we have chaplains attached to every region and command. So an officer who is concerned, struggling to cope, has a range of support options that he or she can reach out to and get professional help. So we believe that we very carefully look after the health and well-being of our officers. What about the culture when an officer gives information? In this instance he claims he gave information to the CMC about another officer and he copped it for that. Things like leaving dog food, cans of dog food on his desk. What does that happen? Any person who is a whistleblower has the option that we have an internal witness support unit within the CMC and within ethical standards command. These officers are offered every assistance and they have the option of taking up that support. That offer was made to the officer. He was made well aware of that. The option to do that remains with the individual. So did he take that offer? The offer was made to him and we can't force anybody to accept support. All we can do is make the mechanisms available at which they are and again I think that we do very well in this area of supporting officers. We understand the pressures of police work generally and particularly people who whistleblowers and that's why we have these established mechanisms in place to support them. Is that concerning? Of course it's concerning and every officer knows that if that sort of conduct is unacceptable in this department and that if any officer is the subject of that they should make a complaint and if they do make a complaint and we become aware of it we will take the appropriate action. I'm satisfied with today's sentence. Two hundred hours of community service. Look the matter of sentence is always one for the appropriate judicial officer be it magistrate or judge. As always in these cases we'll examine all of the material and we'll have a legal opinion prepared on whether we should launch an appeal. You said you personally knew the officer. You must be disappointed then because he'd been so long serving and obviously high performing. Look it's extremely disappointing. There are no winners in this situation whatsoever. This officer has effectively destroyed his career. He's betrayed the trust that the community has in its police force and he's let down ten to half thousand other police. So there are no winners. It's a sad case all around. Will you if this officer does make a complaint regarding these claims of things like dog food. So will you investigate that if he does make a complaint? Of course of course yes we we have a very open culture in the QPS. If anyone makes a complaint about harassment bullying intimidation of any sort under any circumstances we will investigate it. Sorry I didn't understand the question. Given the kind of mental health assessments you do in state crime operations. Are you skeptical I guess that that could be the case? No look I'm not in a position I'm not a mental health professional I'm not in a position to be skeptical or challenge any evidence that was presented. But what I would say is that the symptoms that this officer now has were not apparent to his work mates and were certainly not apparent before he was confronted with his actions. It wasn't until he was confronted about the stealing matter that the symptoms and the full nature of his mental illness became knowledge to everyone.