Jury will consider officers' assault charge

DELIBERATIONS: A jury will retire today to consider a verdict on the four police officers' charged with assault.

The jury will consider its verdicts today in the trial of four Hawke's Bay police officers charged with assaulting a wanted man, who died during his arrest.

Prosecutor Ben Vanderkolk and three defence lawyers have summed up their cases, before a jury of six men and six women in the Napier District Court.

The final lawyer and Judge Phillip Cooper will give their closing remarks today, before the jury retires to consider the verdicts.

Gregory McPeake, 53, died in a Westshore Beach carpark on March 13, 2015.

The accused, who have interim name suppression, each pleaded not guilty to one charge of assaulting Mr McPeake with a weapon.

The trial has centred around whether the force used in trying to apprehend Mr McPeake was appropriate or excessive.

The prosecution accepts that at 179kg he was morbidly obese, in ill-health, had taken drugs, and was suicidal. It's also agreed nothing any officer did had a "causal link" to the death.

Evidence in the court shows six officers advanced on Mr McPeake's two-door Honda CRV, with the acting sergeant in a patrol car making voice appeals to Mr McPeake to get out of the vehicle.

When he did not get out an assault on the vehicle was launched, with the windows being smashed, and OC Spray and Tasers used on the man before dogs also entered the vehicle. Mr McPeake was ultimately forced out, began vomiting as he lay on the ground, and died despite first aid from police and ambulance staff.

In his closing address, prosecutor Mr Vanderkolk questioned the officers' use of tasers and dogs.

The only option for the group was to cordon and contain Mr McPeake. He said the officers should have stepped back and reassessed the situation.

Mr Vanderkolk said they are "unsurprisingly" good police officers. Each were equipped to change and amend their response to Mr McPeake, but they didn't.

It was the officers' duty to reduce the amount of violence. That involved the option to withdraw.

"It was a team of police officers, with all their weapons, against one man in a car that was immobile."

Mr Vanderkolk said all that was needed was for the car doors to be open, and to be held open. That would have given them space for Mr McPeake and a barrier to protect themselves.

Defence lawyer Susan Hughes QC said her client did not get to sit behind a desk in a cozy office, watching a tape and winding it back and forth, in slow motion, and have the benefit of hindsight.

She said he had a duty that night to arrest Mr McPeake, and had to prevent him from hurting himself or someone else.

She said Mr McPeaks' attempts to start the car forced their hands. It was their perception that he was about to flee that made them go forward.

Defence lawyer Jonathon Krebs said his client was hit by Mr McPeake while trying to reach into the car and unlock the door.

Mr Krebs said the crossbow remained a possible threat, until such time it had been found and removed, or from when Mr McPeake had been removed from the car and it was recovered.

It was enough for the officers to just believe that the crossbow was present in the car, he said.

The third defence lawyer, Doug Rishworth said his client was justified in using force to overcome the force used by Mr McPeake to resist arrest.

He said this was a trial by hindsight, because significantly, not a single Crown witness who was at the scene has been critical of the officers.

"They walked into the unknown, and they did everything they could in the circumstances as they believed them to be that night", he said.

Mr Rishworth said all they knew was they were dealing with a violent, dangerous man. It is all about context.

The trial resumes today.