Rhodes, Daniel Cory
Deceased
Daniel Cory Rhodes
Demographics
20y, male
Date of death
2002-10-07
Finding date
2006-03-24
Cause of death
Internal haemorrhaging as a result of a gunshot wound to the left shoulder/scapula region
AI-generated summary
Daniel Cory Rhodes, aged 20, was shot dead by Constable Ricky Lynch during a police encounter in Bundaberg, Queensland on 7 October 2002. Rhodes, who had a significant criminal history and was suspected of carrying a firearm, became agitated when police followed the car he was in and fled on foot. During a struggle with two officers, Rhodes produced a stolen Phoenix .22 calibre pistol and pointed it at the officers. Constable Lynch, believing Constable Jorna was in immediate danger of being shot, fired one fatal shot. The coroner found the shooting was lawfully justified under self-defence provisions. The bullet trajectory confirmed Rhodes was positioned as the officers described. Despite conflicting witness accounts, the coroner found no basis for prosecution. No systemic failures or preventable factors were identified that could have prevented this death.
AI-generated summary and tagging — may contain inaccuracies; refer to original finding for legal purposes.
Specialties
Drugs involved
Contributing factors
- Rhodes possessed a loaded and cocked firearm
- Rhodes pointed firearm at police officers during struggle
- Police intelligence regarding Rhodes carrying firearm not communicated to responding officers
- High-risk criminal history of deceased
- Drug intoxication (methylamphetamine at toxic-fatal level)
Full text
Source and disclaimer
This page reproduces or summarises information from publicly available findings published by Australian coroners' courts. Coronial is an independent educational resource and is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or acting on behalf of any coronial court or government body.
Content may be incomplete, reformatted, or summarised. All court orders for redaction and non-publication are respected; documents with technically defective redaction have been excluded from the database entirely. Always refer to the original court publication for the authoritative record.
Copyright in original materials remains with the relevant government jurisdiction. AI-generated summaries and tagging are for educational purposes only, may contain inaccuracies, and must not be treated as legal documents. We welcome feedback for correction —