‘What actually happened?’: victim of Anzac Day terrorist raids speaks about seven-year wait for justice

It was shortly before 4am on 18 April 2015 when masked police armed with semi-automatic rifles forced their way into houses across Melbourne.

The raids came after Asio warned federal police that a terrorist attack was being planned for Anzac Day, the following week.

But according to six people inside two of the houses that were raided, some of the 200 officers involved in the operation were heavy-handed: they had thrown a suspect into a fridge and left him in a pool of blood on the kitchen floor, repeatedly called an Aboriginal man a "black cunt" and assaulted him, and pointed a gun in the direction of a nine-year-old boy, among a series of other allegations.

Lawyers for the Victorian and Australian federal police spent years denying the claims. But last month the final matter in three separate legal cases arising from the operation codenamed Rising was settled - seven years after the counter-terrorism raids.

For David Cruse, whose case was the last matter finalised, the settling of his legal claim has done nothing to quell a sense of injustice.

Cruse, who is Aboriginal, alleged police grabbed him by the throat, kicked him in the ribs, smashed his head into the floor repeatedly, kneed him in the head, and said words to the effect of "shut up you black cunt" and "I told you not to fuckin look you black cunt".

Cruse still does not know whether any officer was reprimanded for their actions during the raid of his Eumemmerring home. Police denied the conduct occurred in documents filed as part of the case, and the conditions of the settlement - which included financial compensation - are confidential.

"I've said it from the very start: I wouldn't have even taken it to court if someone was held accountable," Cruse said. "And nobody ever was."

The raids across Melbourne's south-eastern suburbs occurred seven months after Numan Haider, 18, attacked two counter-terrorism officers with a knife outside a police station, before being shot dead.

Haider's death had a profound impact on his friends, some of whom had known him since primary school. Authorities suspected the death could be a motivating factor for a terrorist attack.

David Cruse's son, Ethan, Harun Causevic and Sevdet Besim were among the friends who started being watched by authorities.

The trio were targets of the Operation Rising raids, but only Besim was convicted of any offence: he pleaded guilty to planning an attack with the assistance of a 14-year-old boy in the UK, and was sentenced to 14 years in prison. Causevic had terrorism charges related to the raid dropped, and Cruse was never charged.

The raids occurred at a low point in the relationship between the Muslim community and police, the Islamic Council of Victoria spokesperson Adel Salman said.

Counter-terrorism operations were becoming increasingly common as authorities feared young people were being radicalised by Islamic State, but the way in which these raids were conducted, and Haider's death, fostered distrust within both parties.

Salman said that despite the number of Islamic extremism cases drastically reducing in recent years, the council had lingering concerns that police continued to handle such raids as if they were "going into a war zone" and without respecting the sanctity of people's homes.

"It creates distrust, animosity, anger, resentment, and it is counterproductive," Salman said.

Like David Cruse, the family of Harun Causevic sued the Australian and Victorian governments, as the operators of the AFP and Victoria police respectively, in relation to the Operation Rising raids.

According to a statement of claim filed by Causevic's parents, Vehid and Sauda, his sister and his brother, a flash bang device was detonated inside their Hampton Park home on 18 April 2015, before 16 officers from the AFP and Victoria police came inside.

The family said the officers were masked, not wearing uniforms that clearly identified them as police, and did not identify themselves as such, nor declare they had a warrant to search the house.

The officers who entered Vehid and Sauda's room told them not to move and pointed guns at them, with red laser dots appearing on their heads and bodies, the family claimed. Vehid Causevic said he asked what was happening and who the officers were, and one responded with words to the effect "if you say one word I will kill you".

Vehid Causevic claimed he was then dragged out of bed while wearing only his underpants by two officers, struck forcefully and pushed to the floor. He said he was told to get on his hands and knees, and an officer pointed a gun at him, touching his head.

Causevic's sister claimed she had not known the person in her room wearing a balaclava and pointing a gun at her, leaving a red laser dot on her body, was a police officer.

She tried sitting up in bed, but said the officer "pulled away her pillow and bedclothes, leaving her exposed wearing only a low cut singlet top" and she felt "violated [and] fearful that she would be killed, kidnapped or sexually assaulted".

While crying, she said she asked what was going on and who the person was, but was told to shut up and not move.

In her nine-year-old brother's room, an officer pointed a gun towards him, the family said, before allowing him to leave to join his sister in her room.

The Causevics claimed that the raid left them with a psychiatric injury, post-traumatic stress disorder and feeling hurt, humiliated, fearful and distressed.

Sauda Causevic developed a chronic major depressive disorder, and her daughter suffered anorexia nervosa and major depression including suicidal ideation. All family members said they had to pay for medical and psychological treatment.

Lawyers for the police denied much of the Causevics' claims in submissions relating to the case, but settled the matter last year on a confidential basis which included a financial payment. The Causevics declined to comment to Guardian Australia.

Of the three cases, only that of Ethan Cruse, who sued in relation to the conduct of Victoria police, proceeded to trial.

The Victorian supreme court judge Melinda Richards found Cruse was struck in the head by officers while handcuffed, slammed into a fridge, pushed onto the floor, and then struck again numerous times to his face, head, neck and upper body.

"While Mr Cruse was still lying on the floor, an officer told him that there was more to come," Richards found in 2019.

She found that as Cruse was escorted from the house, an officer twisted his wrist and said "don't fucking say a word".

Cruse was awarded $400,000 in damages.

Richards also said the Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission (Ibac) should again review Victoria police's handling of the case, given the conduct of officers during the arrest, the way in which they had compiled their statements after the matter, and the fact Cruse's arrest itself was unlawful.

Ibac took more than 16 months to complete the review, according to a letter sent to Cruse's lawyers in December 2020.

"Ibac regrets that our handling of this matter in terms of timeliness was not what we would have liked, and we are working to improve our response times," Ibac wrote.

Ibac found that Victoria police had wrongly concluded Cruse's complaint about excessive use of force could not be substantiated, and said it had requested that police "consider changing their investigation finding in relation to the complaint".

The letter gave no indication that criminal charges were considered regarding the officers who allegedly assaulted Cruse.

Cruse confirmed he had not heard from Ibac since, and did not know the status of his complaint against Victoria police.

His lawyer, Jeremy King, who also represented the five other people involved in civil cases relating to the Operation Rising raids, said Ethan Cruse's case clearly showed the gross deficiencies in Victoria's police complaints framework, which is currently subject to a state government systemic review.

"If a supreme court judge can't get her referral looked at and actually addressed, what hope has anyone else got?" he said.

"There's no information about what happened to those officers: were they disciplined, kicked out of the force, given a slap on the wrist, what actually happened?"

A Victoria police spokesperson confirmed that after Ibac advised the force it should consider changing its findings in relation to Cruse's excessive use of force complaint from unsubstantiated to substantiated, it conducted a further review of the matter.

"However, it was determined that insufficient evidence existed and the findings of the initial investigation were not changed," the spokesperson said.

Police have therefore conducted two separate investigations and determined on both occasions that none of the officers involved with Cruse's arrest used excessive force, despite a supreme court judge and Ibac finding there was enough evidence the officers had done so.

Victoria police said it was unable to comment directly on the other civil cases as they were subject to confidentiality agreements.

The force confirmed it had overhauled its procedures regarding the taking of police statements after the Cruse case.

Ibac identified "deficiencies" with these practices in the Cruse case, and Guardian Australia has revealed the way statements are taken is also being investigated by the coroner.

A new chief commissioner's instruction issued in February outlines expectations for officers, including that they produce statements and notes independently from other members and without collaboration, and clarifies that body-worn camera footage cannot be viewed until after they document their independent recollection.

An Ibac spokesperson said the Ethan Cruse case had in part resulted in a change in procedure, whereby complaints that are made about excessive force by Victoria police are now routinely reviewed.

The commission was seeking expanded powers to compel Victoria police to change its investigation findings in matters such as the Cruse case, the spokesperson said.

"Unfortunately, there is currently no legislative framework for Ibac to compel Victoria police to change their investigation findings.

"Ibac is seeking explicit powers to conduct reviews and publish their outcomes. Such powers would improve Ibac's impact on Victoria police's conduct of investigations."

An AFP spokesperson said it considered that the conduct and actions of AFP officers during Operation Rising were appropriate.

"The terms of the settlement are subject to non-disclosure agreements and therefore the AFP is unable to comment on them."