Finding into death of Troy John Van Den Bemt
Deceased
Troy John Van Den Bemt
Demographics
48y, male
Date of death
2018-01-28
Finding date
2021-09-17
Cause of death
Gunshot wounds to the upper torso
AI-generated summary
Troy Van Den Bemt, 48, died from gunshot wounds sustained during an attempted armed robbery at a bottle shop in Park Orchards on 28 January 2018. An undercover State Surveillance Unit (SSU) operative fired six shots at Van Den Bemt, who was armed with a sawn-off shotgun and threatening shop staff. The operative's actions were found to be reasonable self-defence undertaken to prevent imminent loss of life. The inquest identified significant operational shortcomings: insufficient contingency planning, poor situational awareness among Armed Crime Squad (ACS) investigators due to over-reliance on mobile phones and lack of GPS technology, ACS being stationed too far from the surveillance operation, and the ACS being unaware that SSU operatives could break cover if facing an imminent threat to life. These factors meant the planned disruption strategy was impractical and the SOG tactical response team could not arrive in time. The coroner recommended implementation of GPS geolocation tracking for investigators working with SSU and appointment of incident controllers for complex operations.
AI-generated summary and tagging — may contain inaccuracies; refer to original finding for legal purposes.
Error types
Contributing factors
- Armed Crime Squad investigators stationed too far from surveillance operation to implement disruption strategy
- Lack of situational awareness among ACS investigators due to poor communication systems and navigation difficulties
- Over-reliance on mobile phone communications instead of proper police radio channels
- ACS unfamiliar with operational area and unable to provide backup to SSU
- Ineffective contingency planning with theoretical rather than practical disruption strategies
- SOG deployment delayed due to being located in city, making timely arrest impossible
- ACS unaware that SSU could break cover if imminent threat to life
- Absence of documented risk assessments despite stated continuous risk assessment
- Insufficient contingencies in briefing note if primary arrest or disruption strategies failed
Coroner's recommendations
- Continue development and implementation of GPS geolocation tracking technology (app) for investigators working with SSU to maintain real-time awareness of operative locations without compromising surveillance
- Continue discussions and implementation of incident controller role in joint planned operations such as armed robbery investigations, with incident controllers appointed to provide objective decision-making, guidance and liaison between ACS and SSU
- Ensure investigators are stationed in proximity to SSU surveillance operations to enable rapid response to contingencies and disruption strategies
- Use appropriate police radio channels instead of mobile phones for operational communications to improve situational awareness
- Develop documented risk assessment templates specific to dynamic operations like armed robbery investigations
- Ensure all ACS investigators briefed on and understand SSU covert-to-overt guidelines regarding imminent threats to life
- Provide GPS navigation devices in operational vehicles to reduce reliance on mobile phone navigation during critical incidents
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 —