Authority reframed? Examining the potential of video-recorded evidence-in-chief as a mechanism for improving police accountability in domestic violence complainant interview-statements

In recent times, Australian police have come under heightened scrutiny for the way they investigate domestic violence (DV). A 2023 review of complaints into police treatment of DV, increased media attention on domestic homicides nationally, and the Prime Minister’s labelling of DV as a ‘national crisis’ have fuelled media calls for greater police accountability in documenting DV. Written statements are a form of police documentation that can shape investigations and court proceedings. This is because they are treated as authoritative descriptions of what occurred, despite being prepared by police and research highlighting statement inaccuracies. Given that differences between written statements and later testimony can lead to the questioning of complainants’ credibility, or claims of police adulteration, officer accountability in this area is important. One mechanism that may offer a means to achieving this is Domestic Violence Evidence-in-Chief (DVEC), audio-visual interview-statements collected by NSW Police. This article draws on data from an evaluation of the utility of DVEC in policing practice to consider whether this recorded format has the potential to increase police accountability in this area. It finds that restrictions in the way DVEC is collected and presented in court may offer possibilities not available with Body Worn Camera footage.