Ahamed Samsudeen. Photo: New Zealand Herald / Greg Bowker
Police knew about the risk of Ahamed Samsudeen committing an attack before an immigration tribunal appeal hearing to determine his deportation, an inquest has heard.
The inquest into the death of Samsudeen heard evidence the police had known in the month before the LynnMall terror attack that he was likely to commit an attack before an immigration tribunal appeal hearing that was scheduled to take place on 13 September 2021.
A lawyer assisting the Coroner, Erin McGill, in her examining of a senior police officer from the National Security Group, referenced an application for surveillance warrant made by the police on 17 August 2021, which raised concerns about the risk of an attack before the appeal hearing.
Samsudeen was at the time being stripped of his refugee status, but his deportation was pending the outcome of his appeal.
McGill asked the senior police officer whether the team surveilling Samsudeen would be aware of this information relating to the risk of an attack, to which the officer said "I would've thought so".
McGill acknowledged that around the end of August, the 13 September hearing date was being rescheduled to a later date due to delays during the Covid-19 lockdown and the fact that Samsudeen had changed his lawyer. It was unclear when the rescheduled date would be.
According to a timeline from a coordinated review of the management of Samsudeen, released by joint government agencies in late 2022, Samsudeen first entered New Zealand from Sri Lanka on a student visa in 2011 and subsequently was granted refugee status.
He was known to police for posting objectionable material depicting graphic violence as early as 2016.
In 2017, a former flatmate of Samsudeen reported to police that Samsudeen told him he wanted to travel to Syria to fight for the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), and that he'd commit a knife attack if he was prevented from doing that.
Samsudeen was arrested in May 2017 at an airport after attempting to fly overseas, and was charged with possession of objectionable material, and would spend nearly four years in remand in custody.
Could attack have been stopped sooner?
The senior police officer from the National Security Group was asked whether the terror attack could've been stopped sooner if a surveillance officer had followed Samsudeen into the mall on 3 September.
Samsudeen had just been released from prison seven weeks prior to the attack.
He was serving a 12-month community sentence and was under 24-7 surveillance by covert police officers due to the high risk he posed to national security.
The inquest heard that a surveillance officer - referred to as Officer D - had followed Samsudeen on the day, but decided not to follow him into the mall.
Under questioning by McGill around why Officer D made that call, the senior officer said Officer D had been surveilling Samsudeen for seven weeks and noticed nothing unusual in his behaviour that day.
He also conceded that Officer D likely didn't know that the Countdown (now Woolworths) supermarket sold knives.
When asked by McGill whether there would've been a different approach to surveillance on the day, if the surveillance team knew the supermarket sold knives, the senior police officer said he couldn't directly answer that.
McGill also noted that Officer D's evidence stated that Samsudeen was making positive plans for the future around the time of the attack, including making enquiries about employment and accommodation options.
After a long line of questions, McGill asked the senior officer if he thought the attack could've been stopped sooner if Officer D had followed Samsudeen into the mall.
The senior officer said "it had the potential to raise the alarm slightly earlier", but added it's uncertain whether it would've stopped the attack earlier.
He said due to the covert nature of surveillance, the officer was unlikely to have been in the same aisle as Samsudeen to see what he was doing.
He conceded that if a surveillance member had seen Samsudeen taking the knife off the shelves, that would've triggered the team to call the Special Tactics Group.
Earlier when Coroner Marcus Elliott opened the inquest, he said it would not be revisiting the conclusion of the Independent Police Conduct Authority finding that two officers were legally justified in shooting Samsudeen, and that the surveillance officer who decided not to follow Samsudeen into the supermarket initially, had acted reasonably.
However, he said that does not mean there was nothing to learn from the attack, and the inquest would discuss recommendations.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
