Finding into death of Krisinda Carmen Smart

Contributing factors

• failure to identify child's age during police encounter
• failure to conduct LEAP database check to determine DHS status
• failure to recognize drug-affected youth as requiring protective intervention
• failure by DHS to obtain safe custody warrant despite multiple red flags
• child in known sex work area at night contrary to placement conditions
• lack of protective intervener powers for residential care workers
• delayed communication between police and street outreach workers
• complex trauma and prior sexual abuse
• damaging maternal relationship not adequately managed
• extended period without intervention before death after discovery of unconsciousness

Coroner's recommendations

1. Department of Health and Human Services ensure all workers, including Residential Care Workers, managing high-risk children be given Protective Intervener Powers to detain them when at immediate and extreme risk of harm
2. Chief Commissioner of Police and Department of Health and Human Services establish a working party to undertake a feasibility study on including a warning flag for 'high risk' children under DHS care on the LEAP database, with consideration of criteria, privacy legislation, data maintenance, police notification protocols, and training
3. Chief Commissioner of Police provide Academy-based training including the circumstances of the Naisbitt and Anderson interaction with Krisinda to prevent similar police failures
4. Minister for Health review section 162 of the Children Youth and Families Act 2005 to amend the definition of 'significant harm' to include circumstances where a child has suffered or is likely to suffer significant harm from drug taking, self-harm or other high-risk behaviours, and to include children classified as High Risk Youth, which would expand mandatory reporting requirements