Aaron Cusack (26) joined Guernsey Police in 2016 and served until his arrest in 2021. He no longer works for the police.
He has been indicted on four counts, three of which are RIPL offences (failure to give police access to his devices) to which he has already pleaded guilty.
The trial revolves around the first count, after Mr Cusack pleaded not guilty to intending to pervert the course of justice.
The trial has been scheduled for five days. During the first day of the trial (3 July) the Royal Court heard Crown Advocate Chris Dunford lay out the prosecution’s case.
The prosecution’s timeline
Late last year [Person A], who was known to police as a vulnerable person, contacted Guernsey Police alleging that they had been raped.
An investigation was opened and Mr Cusack and his partner were put on the case.
It was only discovered later that Mr Cusack had recently been in contact with Person A through social media, something he failed to disclose before taking on the case.
He had previously been sent a topless image from Person A through social media. He raised this at the time and was advised to block Person A, something which he didn’t do as he continued to maintain contact with them.
On 15 October Person A provided their phone to Guernsey Police as part of the investigation into their case. Person A also agreed to undertake an ABE (Achieving Best Evidence) meeting to discuss the case, where Person A would be joined by an appropriate adult.
After the phone had been handed in, Advocate Dunford said Mr Cusack, deviating from usual policy, spent 10 minutes on Person A’s phone before handing it over for a full data download.
The prosecution posited that Mr Cusack was double checking that there was nothing in Person A’s phone to link back to him. Advocate Dunford said it “is impossible to say whether he deleted any data”.
On 18 October Person A and their appropriate adult went to the police station to pick up Person A’s phone. During an exchange between Person A and Mr Cusack in the foyer, someone supporting Person A began to develop concerns with how Mr Cusack was speaking about the rape claim and proceeded to lodge an official complaint.
The following day (19 October) Mr Cusack decided to visit Person A alone. He spent 40 minutes speaking with Person A, the footage of which was captured on his bodyworn camera. Person A subsequently retracted their rape complaint.
The prosecution said that this interaction “did not reflect how policing should take place in the 21st century”.
Advocate Dunford alleges that Mr Cusack was purposely trying to coerce Person A into retracting their complaint so that a full data download of their phone wouldn’t take place and Mr Cusack’s previous contact with them wouldn’t be revealed.
This constitutes the substance of count one.
The prosecution allege that Mr Cusack carried out his offending in plain sight, reviewing Person A’s phone in the office and uploading his bodyworn camera footage to the police database, because he was unaware that a complaint had been lodged and hoped that Person A’s retraction would stop any further investigation.
After he was arrested Mr Cusack refused to allow access to his devices, arguing that there were personal pictures on them. He requested that an external force review them instead.
However, when Jersey Police stepped in to review his devices, Mr Cusack still refused to grant access. The devices were forcefully accessed by police and previous contact between Person A and Mr Cusack was found.
Advocate Dunford stressed that when phones are forcefully broken into some data can be lost.
Several witnesses were called yesterday, including the person who submitted the original complaint and Mr Cusack’s former partner. Mr Cusack continues to maintain that he is innocent of the charge and the trial continues today.
Follow Express for updates…