The Australian Federal Police has found no evidence that race or other discriminatory factors influenced the wrongful arrest of an Aboriginal teenager in Canberra last year, but has not publicly disclosed whether other findings were made against the officers involved.
The AFP Professional Standards Unit launched six investigations in November 2025 into the conduct of six ACT Policing officers involved in the mistaken arrest at Woden.
“All six PRS investigations have now been completed,” the AFP said in a statement.
“While it is not appropriate to comment on the detailed outcomes of individual investigations, there was no evidence to suggest race or other discriminatory factors influenced interactions between police and the young person, or that excessive force was used during the arrest.”
The AFP said any findings against officers would be dealt with internally.
“Consistent with the AFP Integrity Framework, any established findings will be considered for appropriate action,” it said.
“This may include a range of sanctions or other remedial measures.”
The AFP has not said whether any such findings were made, what conduct they may relate to, or whether any officers will face disciplinary action.
Ombudsman found significant shortcomings
The AFP investigations followed a separate investigation by the ACT Ombudsman, released in August, which found significant shortcomings in the police response.
The Ombudsman found officers had mistakenly arrested 17-year-old “Jay” while searching for an alleged armed offender.
Jay was taken from a bus at gunpoint, handcuffed and arrested before police realised less than 90 seconds later that they had the wrong person. He was then released, searched and allowed to return to the bus.
The Ombudsman found the subsequent search of Jay was likely unlawful, with officers failing to properly inform themselves about their search powers.
The report also found no evidence that race played a role in increasing the level of force used against Jay.
However, the Ombudsman identified shortcomings in ACT Policing's understanding of racial profiling. It found the AFP lacked a “clearly understood definition” of racial profiling and had initially adopted a definition that may not have been consistent with its obligations under the Racial Discrimination Act 1975.
The Ombudsman recommended the AFP establish a clear definition of racial profiling aligned with the Act and include it in high-level, binding governance documents.
The report also found police failed to take Jay's details to enable welfare checks after the incident, amounting to a failure in their duty of care.
It said unconscious bias may have been present in officers' assumptions about Jay's living situation, including that he was unhoused.
The Ombudsman also found public statements by the Chief Police Officer soon after the incident became public placed emphasis on support for police in a way that, although unintentionally, undermined the confidence of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities in subsequent police investigative processes.
The Ombudsman made eight recommendations to improve ACT Policing's response to dynamic incidents and its relationship with First Nations communities.
The AFP and ACT Policing accepted five recommendations in full and three in principle.
