📸

the person who signed it was not the person specified in the policy document..

Closing his questions, Davison rounded on Wormald, telling him the raid was a “woefully incompetent and inept performance” by police.
“I don’t accept that,” Wormald shot back.
Davison told him the incompetence ran from those approving the operation through to those who planned it and executed it.
“I don’t accept that at all,” said Wormald.
A disgraceful performance, Davison called it, which brought the police into disrepute in the community.
“I would hope some of the evidence that comes out (during the hearing) refutes that entirely,” said Wormald.

BUT DID IT? It was hard to see what evidence would live up to Wormald’s hope. Rather than showing evidence of a carefully planned mission, the details that emerged during the case gave the impression of an investigation into something that was considered too secret to share — even with those needing as much advance notice as possible.
For any observers left doubting the oddity of the raid, there was one final exchange which had incredible repercussions.
Wormald was asked to run through the meetings held planning the raid. He did, listing meetings and their purposes until he reached 14vDecember. Attending this meeting were Crown Law Office staff, OFCANZ, and US representatives from the Department of Justice. But that was not all — another group had been blacked out on the notes handed into evidence.

Davison: Was there another group of people represented as well at that meeting?
Wormald: Yes there was.
Davison: What field of activity were they involved with?
Wormald: They worked for the government.
Davison: Are you not able to tell us who they were?
Wormald: I’d rather not.
Davison: And the reason?
Wormald: Because of the nature of the organisation.

There was also a question which led to allegations of perjury against Wormald — a claim denied by the officer and police headquarters.

📸