A retired forensic pathologist has described injuries to a man, allegedly assaulted by two police officers, as inconsistent with the force said to have been used.
Emeritus Prof Rex Ferris, of Tauranga, a forensic pathologist for more than 40 years, and an expert witness in last year's David Bain retrial and in the Lindy Chamberlain case in Australia, was the only witness called by the defence in the trial of Constables Brenton David Rooney (33) and Duncan Roy Hollebon (37) in the Dunedin District Court.
The two officers both deny assaulting Mosgiel man Daniel Murray Wiel on February 15 last year.
They have been suspended since the day after an incident in which Mr Wiel was injured while being arrested in Crawford St after the motorcycle he was riding at high speed and without lights was pursued by police.
Rooney also denies a more serious allegation of intentionally injuring Mr Wiel.
• Buy tomorrow's Otago Daily Times for ongoing coverage of this trial
Two other constables, Johnathon Dunn and Lachlan McDonald, earlier told Judge Paul Kellar and a jury that they saw Hollebon and Rooney kicking Mr Wiel who was face-down on the ground as Constables Dunn and McDonald tried to handcuff him.
The constables said Hollebon kicked Mr Wiel three times forcefully on the body and Rooney kicked him once in the face, that kick being described as solid, like someone kicking for goal.
But the accused deny using excessive force.
In their job sheets and interviews with Detective Sergeant Michael Bowman, of Invercargill, they described Consts Dunn and McDonald, both relatively inexperienced officers, struggling to get control of Mr Wiel and handcuff him after he had "dropped" the motorcycle and run along Crawford St.
Mr Wiel was lying with his hands beneath his chest, refusing to move them, so Hollebon said he decided to use some "pain compliance" and placed his right knee behind Mr Wiel's left ear.
That had the desired effect immediately as Mr Wiel's right arm was released.
Const McDonald also managed to get the left arm out so Mr Wiel could be handcuffed.
Because of the continued level of aggression, Hollebon said he placed his right foot on Mr Wiel's right shoulder, telling him he was under arrest for dangerous driving and to calm down.
Mr Wiel was later taken to the hospital with injuries to his face.
He claimed his nose was broken.
But a doctor who saw him at the emergency department described the injuries as "not serious", comprising a 2cm laceration to the right eyelid, grazing to the right cheek and a black eye.
Dr Rowena Howard said she saw no other injury, and Mr Wiel told her he had not been knocked out.
She said there was no evidence of a broken nose.
Prof Ferris, called by Rooney's counsel John Farrow as an expert, said the laceration on Mr Wiel's upper eyelid indicated impact with the rounded edge of something, perhaps the toe of a shoe or a boot.
Because there was no fracture, the injury was unlikely to have been the result of a "solid" kick.
If goal-kicking force was used to kick someone in the eye, there would be fracturing, as the bones in that area were some of the thinnest in the body.
While he could not say how the injury occurred, the amount of force involved was "clearly much less" than that described by Mr Wiel and the other two police officers, Prof Ferris said.
If the right side of Mr Wiel's face was on the ground, it was hard to see how the toe of a boot could scrape along the side of his face and nose, although he could not exclude that.
Asked if Const McDonald's description of Mr Wiel's head moving on the ground in conjunction with the kick was an indication of the force used, Prof Ferris said the best measure of force involved was the absence of fracturing.
He agreed the accused Rooney's description of having made "light contact" with someone, possibly Mr Wiel, as he regained his footing after losing his balance and falling into the group on the ground, was "consistent with the injury".
From the hospital records and the photographs he had seen of Mr Wiel's injuries, there were no indications of a broken nose, Prof Ferris said.
Asked by Hollebon's counsel Anne Stevens if he would expect "visible injury" from two or three kicks - "forceful soccer kicks" - the witness said he would, especially in the chest or rib area where tissue would be crushed against the bone.
Some "pinpoint" marks visible on Mr Wiel's shoulder could be explained by him being pinned to the ground by the officer's knee and marks on the lower left side could be a result of punches.
Prof Ferris said he saw no evidence of any injury to the shoulder where Hollebon said he had placed his foot using "inconsequential" or minor force.
In his written statement to Det Sgt Bowman, Rooney said he "certainly didn't kick" Mr Wiel, so had paid no attention to a comment by Mr Wiel after his arrest, accusing the police of kicking him.
Hollebon, who was interviewed on video, said Constables Dunn and McDonald did not have control of Mr Wiel when he (Hollebon) arrived.
Both officers were "new on the job" and probably had not had much physical confrontation in their "very limited service".
He did not kick Mr Wiel although he had used "pain compliance" on him at one stage, Hollebon said.
