Understaffed police station turns away teen allegedly assaulted at Auckland Grammar
Sunday, 30 November 2025
A vulnerable teenager, already traumatised by an alleged school assault, was turned away from a police station, after months of effort by his family to get him to report the attack.
Police say the refusal was due to staffing shortages and the need for a specialist Evidential Video Interview (EVI), but the family claims the delay undermined months of work to rebuild the boy’s confidence and access justice.
The teenager, who cannot be named because he is a minor, was attacked in an Auckland Grammar toilet block in February 2024. At the time, he was a 13-year-old boarder who had attended the school for just six weeks.
The attack was allegedly preceded by earlier bullying and then a verbal confrontation outside the tuck shop, which the family believes may have been motivated by xenophobia. The boy had lived overseas for the first 11 years of his life, and they say a student reportedly took issue with his accent.
Do you have information about this story that you want to share? Please email Andrea Vance at andrea.vance@thepost.co.nz
READ MORE
A prefect found the boy collapsed on the floor and alerted a teacher, who, along with the school matron and nurse, rushed him to the on-site medical centre and then immediately to Starship Hospital. Medical records seen by the Sunday Star-Times refer to repeated punches to the head over several minutes.
He suffered a concussion, bruising, blurred vision, and bleeding in one eye.
Despite the severity of his injuries, the school initially labelled the incident a play fight, disciplined the teenager, and failed to obtain evidence, including CCTV footage and student-recorded video. The school did not contact police until August.
By that time the child - previously “confident, curious, and full of energy” - was withdrawn and repeatedly missed school. His father claimed he was fearful for his safety and refused to talk about the alleged assault.
Months later, after his family had fought to get him ready to approach police, he attended Onehunga Station alone on March 10, 2025, only to be turned away.
He withdrew further, and never told his family he was unable to make a statement.
His father only learned of this last week, when he obtained the police file following an Official Information Act request. The dismissal had a “catastrophic impact” on the child’s mental wellbeing, he said.
The police file appears to highlight inconsistencies in police statements.
In a statement to the Sunday Star-Times earlier this month, Detective Inspector Chris Barry made three references to the boy’s reluctance to give a statement.
He said: “We have taken steps to acquire further information, as well as speaking with the young person himself. This included an Evidential Video Interview (EVI) being set up with a specialist interviewer in late 2024.
“Unfortunately, this did not progress. Since this time, the young person has continued to decline to speak with police further about this matter.”
The statement did not mention that the child had been turned away.
Barry also said: “Police have explored other avenues to progress this matter further, however without his account we are currently unable to advance this matter.”
This week, Barry did not address the inconsistencies.
He said: “Police has not placed any blame on the young person, the reality is that our processes are bound by the Solicitor-General’s Guidelines for Prosecution.
“As we have previously explained, given conflicting information available to police there is no evidential sufficiency to bring about a prosecution or engage in other alternative pathways.“
He confirmed the boy was turned away. “Given he is a young person, the correct process is to engage through a specialist… EVI. Onehunga is a smaller station, and at that time specialist interviewers that conduct EVIs were not readily available at this station.”
Barry said it was noted on the file “and since that visit our Youth Aid team has continued to engage with the young person to set up this EVI. At this stage he has not engaged further.”
However, the file reveals three emails from a Youth Aid sergeant Rhys Smith. The first, the day after the child’s visit to the police station said: “Significant time has lapsed since the incident, and I just want to understand why you are wishing to give a formal statement now and what you are hoping to achieve?”
The third, a month later, said the file had been “inactivated”.
These emails were missing from the police file and provided when the omission was queried by the boy’s father.
It was “totally untrue” to claim staff had continued to engage with the child, he said. He accused police of being “disingenuous” and of “victim-blaming”.
His son’s behaviour began to spiral after the attack as he lost faith in police and the school’s ability to keep him safe, he added.
The Sunday Star-Times asked Education Minister Erica Stanford whether she was comfortable that a serious assault at school was not reported to police for several months and only after persistent pressure from the parents; whether the Ministry of Education’s current policy, which allows schools to handle potentially criminal assaults internally, meets expectations for student safety; and whether the Government will consider changing the rules to require schools to report serious assaults to police rather than treating them solely as disciplinary matters.
“My expectation is that all children are kept safe at school. Legislation already exists to ensure the safety of students at schools, and serious incidents should be reported to the police,” she said in a statement.
“Schools should use their judgment, and there is nothing in any Ministry of Education guidelines or policy that does not require schools to notify police.”
Auckland Grammar School was sent detailed questions about its handling of the incident. In a statement, headmaster Tim O’Connor said it does not discuss matters related to individual students in the media. “It takes allegations of harm against any student in our care very seriously. Any such allegations are investigated in accordance with due process.”
In a series of letters to the family, the school also defended its handling of the matter, saying it followed its investigation procedures and provided extensive support to the teenager.