Carroll said she had never been approached for more resources by that unit,butafter her first appearance at the inquiry had asked an external consultant to advise on how to properly do so.

That appearance sparked a fresh call for submissions from Childrens Court President Deborah Richards,who is leading the inquiry. More than 200 flowed in.

Carroll,appointed in 2019 for a five-year term as thestate’s first female police commissioner,was also pressed by O’Gorman on whether she accepted the weight of evidence suggested sexism and misogyny was an “extensive problem”.

But Carroll sought not to “tar all” of the force with the same brush. “I know I have significant problems in some of those areas,” she said.

Among the evidence heard was of a sergeant teaching a class of academy recruits who was recorded saying of Indigenous people:“you can smell them before you see them”.

The inquiry also heard of a 2018 dossier compiled by senior women within the force,in which one alleged she knew of five others who were raped in the job.

Even Carroll detailed how she herself was attacked by a “sexual predator”earlier in her career. Another junior female officer was disciplined for not reporting sexual harassment from her supervisor when first starting.

Many perpetrators were not disciplined. A taskforce to weed out sexist and predatory behaviour,dubbed Juniper,was set up in 2019 but wound up a year later because it was seen as a “toothless tiger”.

However,it had heard 84 allegations from 26 staff against one senior officer,whose conduct went back to 2002 but who had not been subject to a complaint previously.

A total of 80 allegations were substantiated,including nine sexual assaults. The officer faced no consequences because he medically retired in 2019.

The inquiry heard that a reliance on one element of the disciplinary system,which allows managers to simply give “guidance” to those doing the wrong thing,meant women were less likely to come forward with complaints.

Carroll agreed with suggestions from O’Gorman that this was “broken”,and it was reasonable for officers to have a “deep fear of speaking out” and lack of confidence in a system that should be protecting them.