A hero emerges in Duffy

By 18 November, 2012 63

Members of the public intervened to detain a suspect in the early hours of this morning, which led to ACT Policing arresting and charging a 15-year-old boy for aggravated burglary.

An 18-year-old man had been with a group of friends in Duffy, waiting for a lift from his father around 12.50am today (Sunday, November 18) when another group of young people, including one with a red bandanna tied across his face, were seen to walk across the carpark toward the Duffy shops.

The man left with his father and friends but concerned about the suspicious behaviour they had witnessed, drove back to the Duffy shops a short time later to see the same group of people running from the shops, and two youths climbing from a hole smashed in the glass shopfront of one store.

The 18-year-old man gave chase on foot across the nearby oval, and tackled one of the offenders to the ground. The 15-year-old alleged offender was then detained while police were called.

The young person, from South Canberra, was charged with aggravated burglary and will face the ACT Childrens Court tomorrow (Monday, November 19). Police are urging any witnesses who may have information about the burglary at the Duffy shops, or may be able to identify other co-offenders, to contact Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000, or via the website at www.act.crimestoppers.com.au. Information may be provided anonymously.

[Courtesy ACT Policing]

Please login to post your comments
63 Responses to A hero emerges in Duffy
#31
Jethro10:07 pm, 19 Nov 12

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

Except the Greens…

Aww, are you guys still sore that you lost the election?

Actually, I voted for the Greens in 2008 but not this time.. so I’m one of those who helped them lose those 3 seats at this election.

#32
stormboy8:16 am, 20 Nov 12

Pity we have to wait another term to finish them off Jethro

#33
dpm12:45 pm, 20 Nov 12

Wow, more ‘thugs’ who need to be ‘rightly be charged with assault’, hey Stevian… ;-)

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/commuters-tackle-teen-after-train-station-stabbing-20121120-29mv4.html

What’s the world coming to when you can’t stab someone without being detained by violent thugs until the police arrive??

#34
Stevian12:54 pm, 20 Nov 12

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

King_of_the_Muppets said :

Stevian – what defines this young man as a thug – who committed an assault? Clearly you were there and saw this take place?

“There is another kind of evil we must fear most, the indifference of good men.”

Clearly you are always the innocent bystander?

I’m pretty sure stevian just despises decent people and loves criminal filth.

Not at all. As the Great Prophet once said:

“All the cops are criminals and all the sinners saint”

Who watches the Watchmen
You can’t tell the players without a scorecard

#35
Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd2:01 pm, 20 Nov 12

Stevian said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

King_of_the_Muppets said :

Stevian – what defines this young man as a thug – who committed an assault? Clearly you were there and saw this take place?

“There is another kind of evil we must fear most, the indifference of good men.”

Clearly you are always the innocent bystander?

I’m pretty sure stevian just despises decent people and loves criminal filth.

Not at all. As the Great Prophet once said:

“All the cops are criminals and all the sinners saint”

Who watches the Watchmen
You can’t tell the players without a scorecard

Thats not a very good rant, stevian. i know you can do better than that.

#36
Stevian2:20 pm, 20 Nov 12

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Stevian said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

King_of_the_Muppets said :

Stevian – what defines this young man as a thug – who committed an assault? Clearly you were there and saw this take place?

“There is another kind of evil we must fear most, the indifference of good men.”

Clearly you are always the innocent bystander?

I’m pretty sure stevian just despises decent people and loves criminal filth.

Not at all. As the Great Prophet once said:

“All the cops are criminals and all the sinners saint”

Who watches the Watchmen
You can’t tell the players without a scorecard

Thats not a very good rant, stevian. i know you can do better than that.

You don’t and I can’t

#37
King_of_the_Muppets2:39 pm, 20 Nov 12

Stevian said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Stevian said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

King_of_the_Muppets said :

Stevian – what defines this young man as a thug – who committed an assault? Clearly you were there and saw this take place?

“There is another kind of evil we must fear most, the indifference of good men.”

Clearly you are always the innocent bystander?

I’m pretty sure stevian just despises decent people and loves criminal filth.

Not at all. As the Great Prophet once said:

“All the cops are criminals and all the sinners saint”

Who watches the Watchmen
You can’t tell the players without a scorecard

Thats not a very good rant, stevian. i know you can do better than that.

You don’t and I can’t

Throwing a quote out there is great but generally you do so to strengthen your argument?
Clearly the Police watch the watchman in this case?

When does a bystander become the accomplice?
Standing and doing nothing can be more of the crime…..(forget a criminal crime, a moral crime)

#38
Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd3:08 pm, 20 Nov 12

Stevian said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Stevian said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

King_of_the_Muppets said :

Stevian – what defines this young man as a thug – who committed an assault? Clearly you were there and saw this take place?

“There is another kind of evil we must fear most, the indifference of good men.”

Clearly you are always the innocent bystander?

I’m pretty sure stevian just despises decent people and loves criminal filth.

Not at all. As the Great Prophet once said:

“All the cops are criminals and all the sinners saint”

Who watches the Watchmen
You can’t tell the players without a scorecard

Thats not a very good rant, stevian. i know you can do better than that.

You don’t and I can’t

I do(becuase i have seen you do it) and you can(becuase i have seen you do it!

#39
IrishPete10:55 am, 23 Nov 12

devils_advocate said :

Gungahlin Al said :

Tiresome and unnecessary line in a positive thread.

If by ‘tiresome and unnecessary’ you mean ‘ironic, yet accurate and slightly hilarious’ then sure.

No, tiresome and jaded. Inaccurate and only slight amusing.

Its the right wing politicans who ditch effective programs that satisfy victims and prevent reoffending (and save money by avoiding hugely expensive court costs and imprisonment), solely in the interests of ignorant populism – see http://www.smh.com.au/queensland/youth-justice-program-loses-half-its-staff-20121122-29sgp.html and http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2012/s3582293.htm for recent examples.

As a Greens member, I praise the young man who intervened at risk to himself, who makes a great role model for his peers. And I say put the offender in a room with his victim, rather than take the whole process out of the victim’s hands and into the courts, and possibly juvenile detention (on remand for months while the courts decide to give him a suspended sentence) with predictable outcome.

Locking people up is expensive and doesn’t work to prevent reoffending. That’s well-established everywhere. Locking them up only prevents them offending while they are in custody, and actually not even that – they just offend in custody instead. It’s a very expensive way of preventing crime. The costs are mainly staff costs – to reduce the cost you have to reduce staffing levels, and then you’ll have more escapes and more offending within custody.

The Greens don’t want to let offenders roam the streets, they want to be innovative about preventing reoffending.

IP

#40
Thumper11:10 am, 23 Nov 12

http://the-riotact.com/never-bring-scissors-to-a-gunfight-wild-night-in-belconnen/89303

Obviously these guys just need some understanding and a quiet chat about their actions..

All solved.

#41
devils_advocate11:34 am, 23 Nov 12

IrishPete said :

The Greens don’t want to let offenders roam the streets, they want to be innovative about preventing reoffending.

IP

I think you’re missing the human rights angle. Many people find the concept (or more to the point, the implementation) of a so-called ‘human rights compliant’ AMC a bit of a joke. For a range of reasons, mainly because people find it perverse to go to such lengths to protect the rights of criminals when there are innocents in our community who, arguably and by logical extension from the entitlements enjoyed by AMC residents, have their human rights routinely ignored.

#42
IrishPete8:03 pm, 23 Nov 12

devils_advocate said :

IrishPete said :

The Greens don’t want to let offenders roam the streets, they want to be innovative about preventing reoffending.

IP

I think you’re missing the human rights angle. Many people find the concept (or more to the point, the implementation) of a so-called ‘human rights compliant’ AMC a bit of a joke. For a range of reasons, mainly because people find it perverse to go to such lengths to protect the rights of criminals when there are innocents in our community who, arguably and by logical extension from the entitlements enjoyed by AMC residents, have their human rights routinely ignored.

Could you tell us what human rights aspects of the AMC you object to? (And let’s leave the needle and syringe program off the agenda for now, as it doesn’t exist yet, and possibly never will.)

IP

#43
Tetranitrate12:20 pm, 24 Nov 12

You know what Zed should have done after the election? He should have come out publicly and said:
“The electorate passed judgement on the Greens – it’s clear that labor is going to be returned to government, but it would be highly unjust if the Greens were able to have a disproportionate influence on policy given what has just happened. Therefore the Canberra Liberals will reluctantly support the retention of Katie Gallagher as chief minister. We will vote through the budget and other critical functions of government, and vote on other legislation on its own merits.”

-It wouldn’t have been necessary to actually do it in the end, but if such a commitment was credibly made it would have blown away Rattenbury’s bargaining power.

#44
milkman12:28 pm, 24 Nov 12

IrishPete said :

Locking people up is expensive and doesn’t work to prevent reoffending.

They can’t reoffend if you don’t let them out!

#45
devils_advocate5:26 pm, 24 Nov 12

IrishPete said :

devils_advocate said :

IrishPete said :

The Greens don’t want to let offenders roam the streets, they want to be innovative about preventing reoffending.

IP

I think you’re missing the human rights angle. Many people find the concept (or more to the point, the implementation) of a so-called ‘human rights compliant’ AMC a bit of a joke. For a range of reasons, mainly because people find it perverse to go to such lengths to protect the rights of criminals when there are innocents in our community who, arguably and by logical extension from the entitlements enjoyed by AMC residents, have their human rights routinely ignored.

Could you tell us what human rights aspects of the AMC you object to? (And let’s leave the needle and syringe program off the agenda for now, as it doesn’t exist yet, and possibly never will.)

IP

I don’t object to human rights at all. I support human rights. I’m just saying we should be prioritising the human rights of non-criminals over those of criminals (by the time they end up in AMC, usually career criminals).

Human rights such as food, shelter, safety, education, etc.

#46
Spiral7:43 pm, 24 Nov 12

IrishPete said :

And I say put the offender in a room with his victim, rather than take the whole process out of the victim’s hands and into the courts, and possibly juvenile detention (on remand for months while the courts decide to give him a suspended sentence) with predictable outcome.

This really is a good policy and should be brought in immediately.

Do the victims get of choice of using Tazers or capsicum spray on the offender if they just want to have some mostly harmless payback and baseball bats if they are really interested in some old style justice?

#47
Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd10:48 pm, 24 Nov 12

Spiral said :

IrishPete said :

And I say put the offender in a room with his victim, rather than take the whole process out of the victim’s hands and into the courts, and possibly juvenile detention (on remand for months while the courts decide to give him a suspended sentence) with predictable outcome.

This really is a good policy and should be brought in immediately.

Do the victims get of choice of using Tazers or capsicum spray on the offender if they just want to have some mostly harmless payback and baseball bats if they are really interested in some old style justice?

Pretty good idea.

#48
DrKoresh12:23 am, 25 Nov 12

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Spiral said :

IrishPete said :

And I say put the offender in a room with his victim, rather than take the whole process out of the victim’s hands and into the courts, and possibly juvenile detention (on remand for months while the courts decide to give him a suspended sentence) with predictable outcome.

This really is a good policy and should be brought in immediately.

Do the victims get of choice of using Tazers or capsicum spray on the offender if they just want to have some mostly harmless payback and baseball bats if they are really interested in some old style justice?

Pretty good idea.

Fine, but don’t bitch when you’re dragged, shackled, into a room for disproportionate retribution at the hands of the disabled person who’s spot you stole or whatever other minor transgressions most all people make.

#49
milkman8:15 am, 25 Nov 12

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Spiral said :

IrishPete said :

And I say put the offender in a room with his victim, rather than take the whole process out of the victim’s hands and into the courts, and possibly juvenile detention (on remand for months while the courts decide to give him a suspended sentence) with predictable outcome.

This really is a good policy and should be brought in immediately.

Do the victims get of choice of using Tazers or capsicum spray on the offender if they just want to have some mostly harmless payback and baseball bats if they are really interested in some old style justice?

Pretty good idea.

Very good idea!

#50
IrishPete9:31 am, 25 Nov 12

Spiral said :

This really is a good policy and should be brought in immediately.

Do the victims get of choice of using Tazers or capsicum spray on the offender if they just want to have some mostly harmless payback and baseball bats if they are really interested in some old style justice?

and this policy is already in place in the ACT http://www.justice.act.gov.au/criminal_and_civil_justice/restorative_justice for young offenders.

It used to be in place for adults as part of the RISE project, but it disappeared.

I don’t think violence is encouraged, though.

IP

#51
IrishPete9:39 am, 25 Nov 12

devils_advocate said :

I don’t object to human rights at all. I support human rights. I’m just saying we should be prioritising the human rights of non-criminals over those of criminals (by the time they end up in AMC, usually career criminals).

Human rights such as food, shelter, safety, education, etc.

It would be kinda hard to lock people up against their will (prison) and not provide them with food and shelter. Education might be optional, but as for safety, if you lock someone up and make no effort to keep them safe, you’ll probably end up being sued for damages.

Of course everyone in the community should have access to affordable and decent food, housing and educaton, and be safe (which often goes with decent housing). These are basic human rights.

But to go back to the original point, if imprisonment makes the public less safe by making offenders “worse”, then the goal of keeping the community safe is missed. Locking people up forever sounds like a great idea (as someone else implies), but only if you want to pay taxes high enough to build and operate many more AMCs.

IP

#52
Spiral1:56 pm, 25 Nov 12

DrKoresh said :

Fine, but don’t bitch when you’re dragged, shackled, into a room for disproportionate retribution at the hands of the disabled person who’s spot you stole or whatever other minor transgressions most all people make.

People who park in disabled spots when they aren’t entitled to should be Tasered. As for the rest, I consider straw man arguments to be a compliment.

#53
Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd4:27 pm, 25 Nov 12

DrKoresh said :

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd said :

Spiral said :

IrishPete said :

And I say put the offender in a room with his victim, rather than take the whole process out of the victim’s hands and into the courts, and possibly juvenile detention (on remand for months while the courts decide to give him a suspended sentence) with predictable outcome.

This really is a good policy and should be brought in immediately.

Do the victims get of choice of using Tazers or capsicum spray on the offender if they just want to have some mostly harmless payback and baseball bats if they are really interested in some old style justice?

Pretty good idea.

Fine, but don’t bitch when you’re dragged, shackled, into a room for disproportionate retribution at the hands of the disabled person who’s spot you stole or whatever other minor transgressions most all people make.

Never in my life have I used a disabled parking space!!!

#54
devils_advocate8:48 am, 26 Nov 12

IrishPete said :

devils_advocate said :

I don’t object to human rights at all. I support human rights. I’m just saying we should be prioritising the human rights of non-criminals over those of criminals (by the time they end up in AMC, usually career criminals).

Human rights such as food, shelter, safety, education, etc.

It would be kinda hard to lock people up against their will (prison) and not provide them with food and shelter. Education might be optional, but as for safety, if you lock someone up and make no effort to keep them safe, you’ll probably end up being sued for damages.

Of course everyone in the community should have access to affordable and decent food, housing and educaton, and be safe (which often goes with decent housing). These are basic human rights.

But to go back to the original point, if imprisonment makes the public less safe by making offenders “worse”, then the goal of keeping the community safe is missed. Locking people up forever sounds like a great idea (as someone else implies), but only if you want to pay taxes high enough to build and operate many more AMCs.

IP

I recently attended a seminar which covered topics including Australia’s only human-rights compliant detention facility (which, given the human rights appear largely determined by the jurisdiction itself with only loose reference to internatinoal law… nevermind). Anyway, my current understanding is that the AMC goes well beyond the minimum requirements that people would expect in terms of accomodation, recreational facilities, etc.

I think the term ‘human rights’ has been used to justify a far more privileged experience for criminal offenders in AMC than what would ordinarily be expected by society. I think this money could be spent on more deserving (less undeserving?) individuals in our community.

#55
IrishPete8:12 pm, 27 Nov 12

devils_advocate said :

I recently attended a seminar which covered topics including Australia’s only human-rights compliant detention facility (which, given the human rights appear largely determined by the jurisdiction itself with only loose reference to internatinoal law… nevermind). Anyway, my current understanding is that the AMC goes well beyond the minimum requirements that people would expect in terms of accomodation, recreational facilities, etc.

I think the term ‘human rights’ has been used to justify a far more privileged experience for criminal offenders in AMC than what would ordinarily be expected by society. I think this money could be spent on more deserving (less undeserving?) individuals in our community.

I asked for specifics and still none are being provided. Should the roofs of their cells have holes for the rain to come in? Should the beds have no mattresses? Should they be locked in their cells 23 hours a day?

Incidentally a third of them are on Remand and are therefore innocent until proven guilty – they cannot be referred to as “criminal offenders”.

IP

#56
KeenGolfer8:34 pm, 27 Nov 12

IrishPete said :

Incidentally a third of them are on Remand and are therefore innocent until proven guilty – they cannot be referred to as “criminal offenders”.

Except for the fact they already have a long prior list of criminal convictions, so they are criminal offenders.

#57
TheDancingDjinn9:05 pm, 27 Nov 12

IrishPete said :

devils_advocate said :

I recently attended a seminar which covered topics including Australia’s only human-rights compliant detention facility (which, given the human rights appear largely determined by the jurisdiction itself with only loose reference to internatinoal law… nevermind). Anyway, my current understanding is that the AMC goes well beyond the minimum requirements that people would expect in terms of accomodation, recreational facilities, etc.

I think the term ‘human rights’ has been used to justify a far more privileged experience for criminal offenders in AMC than what would ordinarily be expected by society. I think this money could be spent on more deserving (less undeserving?) individuals in our community.

I asked for specifics and still none are being provided. Should the roofs of their cells have holes for the rain to come in? Should the beds have no mattresses? Should they be locked in their cells 23 hours a day?

Incidentally a third of them are on Remand and are therefore innocent until proven guilty – they cannot be referred to as “criminal offenders”.

IP

I imagine the specifics would be..
Some prisons in this country allow Foxtel in the cells. – Now personally i don’t think that should be allowed.
Some prisons in this country allow niceties in the cells – personal toasters, cooking apparatus’, special foods they enjoy. – Nope i don’t like that either.

Personally i think if you have gotten to the point where you are in prison for so long that you think you need this stuff, then you don’t deserve it.

I have shown compassion for some criminals before, but it is very rare ( i think that coming from war is a better reason to be messed up than say growing up in Emu Ridge, and not having a lot of money)
that aside..

I am not saying hurt them, or freeze them, or starve them, or even deprive them of education ( let’s face it, we want them to have some kind of way to make honest money right?) But do not allow them things that people on the outside who have never done anything wrong cannot afford,because of what ever reason.

Again, only speaking for myself..

#58
Stevian10:41 am, 28 Nov 12

KeenGolfer said :

IrishPete said :

Incidentally a third of them are on Remand and are therefore innocent until proven guilty – they cannot be referred to as “criminal offenders”.

Except for the fact they already have a long prior list of criminal convictions, so they are criminal offenders.

Except. under law, one can not be tried for the same crime twice, so they are not criminal offenders, under law

#59
Chop7110:58 am, 28 Nov 12

Do they seriously get foxtel? You can’t be serious? Please tell me they are not sitting there watching the crime investigation channel all day.

#60
NoImRight12:22 pm, 28 Nov 12

One advantage of priveleges in prison is its a form of control. If they have something that can be taken away they can be punished. Give them nothing to lose and they will act like it.

Advertisement
GET PREMIUM MEMBERSHIP
Advertisement

Halloween in Australia?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

IMAGES OF CANBERRA

Advertisement
Sponsors
Advertisement
Copyright © 2014 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.