Daniel Jurgens, 29, was handed a two-year good behaviour order. Photo: Albert McKnight.
Daniel Jurgens aspired to become a fully fledged officer in the Australian Federal Police (AFP), but his repeated sharing of secret police information has brought his career plans to an end.
He was a relatively inexperienced protective services officer with the AFP when he shared the restricted information several times between August and October 2023, the ACT Magistrates Court heard.
He took a copy of CCTV footage showing himself being assaulted by a detainee at the ACT Watch House and texted it to his mother, then also told her personal details about this detainee during a phone call.
Also, he twice told his partner about reports involving two people she knew soon after these incidents were sent over the internal police systems.
Jurgens, 29, faced the ACT Magistrates Court on Monday (18 August) and pleaded guilty to one count of the unauthorised disclosure of information by a Commonwealth officer.
His lawyer, Kevin Raison, said there was no nefarious reason why his client had shared the information, nor had he obtained any benefit from doing so.
He also said his client reported there was a culture at the AFP where staff would view CCTV of incidents.
Mr Raison said his client had been suspended with pay by the AFP due to the proceedings until early this year, when he resigned, and he had since taken a job in the plumbing industry.
He requested that his client be issued a non-conviction order, as a conviction could have consequences for him in his new field of employment.
Barrister James Maher, appearing for the prosecution, argued the court should impose a conviction. He said Jurgens had only gone through his training at the AFP college in 2022, but that meant the obligations he was taught should have been relatively fresh in his mind.
Mr Maher also said the court would be concerned to hear there was a culture of watching CCTV incidents in the AFP.
Chief Magistrate Lorraine Walker noted that when Jurgens shared the restricted information, he had only recently graduated, he had wanted to become a fully fledged police officer, had shown genuine shame and remorse for his actions and had no prior criminal history.
She said the offending reflected a degree of immaturity and poor judgment, but the potential repercussions of his actions mean it was not a trivial matter.
The chief magistrate said his offending was not isolated and she highlighted the potential issues that could come from sharing information about an ongoing police investigation in real time.
She was not satisfied she should not record a conviction.
Jurgens was convicted and sentenced to a two-year good behaviour order, for which he had to provide a $2000 security.
Nothing stopping you getting it off the ground yourself, David. You will need a few hundred million… View