Fax (02) 9283 2911

Monday, 30 November 1998

Dear Ms. Moss,

Re: Your undated letter received 30 November 1998

We write to express serious concerns about matter handling within the Ombudsman’s office. Mr. Todd made a telephone call to speak with you on November 26 in relation to documents that were to be released that might cause credibility harm to the Ombudsman’s office.

You appear to have assumed that the conversation was in relation to Mr. Todd’s complaint assessed by Mr. Wilson of your office. It is unwise to make assumptions as seems to be common within your office and it’s staff.

Mr. Todd did not call to discuss complaint C/98/6795 and the investigation conducted by Mr. Stephen Wilson. Perhaps you will extend the curtesy and contact Mr. Todd as per his telephone message of 26 November. More likely you will not.

Whilst we have your attention on the subject of C/98/6795, we wish to correct your newly presented misinformation.

1. You state that Mr. Wilson found no evidence to substantiate Mr. Todd’s complaint. Yet Mr. Wilson has at no time asked Mr. Todd to provide evidence. Mr. Todd suggested that Mr. Wilson be provided with an overview of concerns prior to the Mediation Meeting due to Mr. Todd’s phone call expressing concerns of harassment. Mr. Wilson agreed the behaviour described was in fact harassment by the NSW Police Service and that the overview might help his investigation.
2. Mr. Todd has not indicated he is dissatisfied with the decision made by your office. Can you show any letter from Mr. Todd expressing this? (Other than this letter.)
3. You are wrongly advised of the facts in relation to the conciliation meeting. The meeting was scheduled for 17 November. Mr. Todd requested that the meeting be postponed for the following reasons as was explained to Mr Wilson in a telephone conversation on November 3:
1. That Mr. Todd was required to attend court as summonsed by the NSW Police on November 18, the day after the mediation meeting and Mr. Todd felt that there may be a connection between the two matters. Evidence has been obtained that indicates there is a connection. Mr. Wilson has never met with Mr. Todd to see this evidence. Nor has it been requested.
2. Inspector Hamlet has not responded to Mr. Todd’s letter of 10 November which raises the fact that new information had become available. This information has been denied by Inspector Hamlet on previous occasions. This information was provided to Mr. Todd by the NSW Police Service itself.
3. Inspector Hamlet had not responded to Mr. Todd letter of 13 November. Inspector Hamlet still has not at the time of this writing responded to the letter of 13 November in which over 30 questions are asked. It’s not possible to hold a mediation meeting whilst there are outstanding particulars. Do you feel it’s possible to mediate a resolution to a problem if one party – in this case the NSW Police – refuse to answer the questions raised by the complainant? What about providing evidence to the complainant?
4. Mr. Todd notified Mr. Wilson on November 13 that the meeting needed to be postponed until Inspector Hamlet had answered the questions raised by Mr. Todd. A copy of these questions is available for you upon your request.
5. At no time did Mr. Todd cancel the meeting. In fact Mr. Todd requested that Mr. Wilson attend a meeting at Camden on November 17 as scheduled anyway in order that Mr. Todd could present the evidence and information to Mr. Wilson.
6. Mr. Wilson rejected this stating that he had better things to do with his time and that this case was not important enough. This was in fact witnessed by Mrs. Todd who was intently listening to the conversation.
7. The meeting was therefore not cancelled by Mr. Todd or at Mr. Todd’s request. Mr. Todd still understands the meeting will take place once Inspector Hamlet answers the questions sent on November 13. Can you explain why Inspector Hamlet has not answered these questions?
4. We feel your office is negligent in it’s procedure and that the Ombudsman’s office has taken a one sided investigation into the matter and is not really concerned with misconduct of the NSW Police Service. To use a cliché – the Ombudsman’s office and held a Kangaroo Court and made a decision without hearing all the evidence. If this is not the case, we suggest that you make an effort to arrange a meeting between Mr. Todd, Mr Wilson and yourself so that this might be otherwise shown to be an incorrect allegation.
5. You state that your office has a procedure by which decisions made by your staff may be reviewed, however that you need something in writing.
6. Ms. Moss, this is your notice in writing that the matter needs to be reviewed.
7. This is your notice in writing that the Ombudsman’s office failed in it’s mission to investigate a matter.
8. Mr. Todd and his family have never been approached by the Mr Wilson (or anyone from your office) to provide evidence or another other details. In fact Mr. Wilson, even at first contact, stated that the NSW Police would be required to provide their report to the Ombudsman’s office prior to any information being requested of or presented by Mr. Todd.
9. The Ombudsman’s office has never confirmed in writing that Mr. Todd’s complaint was even recognised. Nor has the office at any time acknowledged any fax sent by Mr. Todd.
10. To obtain access to the evidence you will be required to arrange a meeting. Mr. Todd is not prepared to release original or copies of documents that are confidential nor is Mr. Todd prepared to release copies of video tapes at this time.
11. It is evident that your staff have failed in their obligation to request the evidence and arrange a suitable manner in which to meet with Mr. Todd.

Start with a little openness, trust and integrity and we are sure this matter can be drawn to a healthy close.