Finding into death of Kelly Ann Thompson
Deceased
Kelly Ann Thompson
Demographics
43y, female
Date of death
2014-02-09
Finding date
2016-04-21
Cause of death
Stab wounds to the chest
AI-generated summary
Kelly Thompson was fatally stabbed by her estranged partner Wayne Wood on 9 February 2014 after he forcibly entered her home. Over 39 days from initial police contact on 1 January 2014, multiple system failures contributed to an inadequate response to escalating risks. Critical failures included: attending police officers failing to properly record an alleged strangulation on the initial incident form (L17), missing the opportunity to charge Wood with serious assault; breach reports not being acted upon promptly despite evidence of escalating controlling and stalking behaviour; repeated police-facilitated property collections that were poorly monitored; and a junior officer's failure to respond to a concerned neighbour's call on the night of the death. While the coroner found the death was preventable, the evidence did not establish that these failures directly caused the death. The case reveals serious gaps in family violence risk assessment, inter-agency information sharing, and police adherence to established procedures and policies.
AI-generated summary and tagging — may contain inaccuracies; refer to original finding for legal purposes.
Specialties
Error types
Drugs involved
Contributing factors
- failure by attending police to properly investigate or record alleged strangulation on 1 January 2014
- critical omission of strangulation allegation from L17 risk assessment form
- inadequate follow-up by Wyndham Family Violence Team due to flawed initial L17
- breaches of intervention order not acted upon promptly or with appropriate consequences
- multiple police-facilitated property collections that enabled continued contact and control
- failure of junior police officer to respond appropriately to concerned neighbour's call on 9 February 2014
- lack of cross-agency information sharing
- 5-day delay in serving interim intervention order
- victim not adequately informed of escalating risk despite multiple service interactions
- perpetrator's escalating stalking, controlling behaviour and explicit threats not appropriately managed
Coroner's recommendations
- The Victorian Government, in implementing recommendations of the Royal Commission across the family violence sector, should adopt the practice that front line workers provide each risk assessment to the applicant, applicants legal representatives, local community family violence services, the magistrate during an IVO hearing, and to Victoria Police
- Victoria Police should implement changes to require police officers attending property collections where an IVO is in place to: review available information before attending including past L17 assessments and LEAP notes; actively utilise the property exchange as an opportunity for risk assessment and risk management; give consideration to whether completion of a Form L17 is required; and record attendance and observations on LEAP
- Victoria Police and the Magistrates' Court of Victoria should develop an information exchange system enabling details of intervention order applications made by self-represented or privately represented parties to be uploaded to LEAP in the same way as police-initiated applications
- Victoria Police should examine the feasibility of developing a system for recording telephone calls to police stations by parties to family violence incidents, creating a record visible to members who subsequently check parties on LEAP
- AFMs should be informed by police if the perpetrator is not charged with breach of the IVO within seven days
- AFMs should be educated and advised by Victoria Police and other family violence agencies to call 000 to report breaches of an IVO
Full text
Related cases
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 —