CCTV fails when it might be inconvenient to Police.

johnboy 4 August 2005 85

Following on from the highly controversial subject of Saturday morning’s potentially fatal high speed non-pursuit through the de-facto pedestrian area that is the civic bus interchange (which has left 21 year old Clea Rose fighting for her life in hospital), comes the peculiar news that all three of the police cameras which could have recorded the potentially fatal incident had a “technical issue” which no-one cares to give us details on. A technical issue which was not so grave that it couldn’t be easily remedied but which will prevent anyone ever knowing what actually hapenned.

Anyone else thinking a number of coincidences begin to take on a certain aroma?

Time for a new body independent body to supervise CCTV in Canberra. To protect the police as much as to protect the citizenry from them.

UPDATED: The Canberra Times has coverage here. It would appear all footage from the cameras is meant to be recorded to hard drive but the police are claiming that this stopped hapenning on 27 July and no-one noticed. I’m confident at least 50 RiotACT readers, myself included, could in a few hours add parity checking to the system so that when recording stops alarm bells ring. So we’ll be seeing resignations from those responsible for the cameras will we?

The Legislative Assembly’s Opposition spokesman on police matters Steve Pratt questioned whether there had been a technical fault with the CCTV recordings, or if the police were simply trying to cover up what had happened.

Frankly I think some of you owe ORL and other witnesses an apology, but that’s just my opinion.

FURTHER UPDATE: ABC Online is reporting the Chief Minister’s “grave concerns” on this issue. He has ordered a review. One imagines the review will ask if these blackouts only occur at times convenient to the police, or, if they are more widespread, why this is the first time it has been mentioned.

YET ANOTHER UPDATE: The AFP have seen fit to put their media release online with a rebuke for members of the public who have spoken to the media but not to them, and the important bit buried in the final paragraph.

AND FINALLY: The Pratt asks the wrong questions in this media release.

What's Your Opinion?

Please login to post your comments, or connect with
85 Responses to CCTV fails when it might be inconvenient to Police.
« Previous 1 3 4 5
LurkerGal LurkerGal 5:06 pm 09 Aug 05

Ah well, I probably deserve it….

Thumper Thumper 4:30 pm 09 Aug 05

Errrr… Holesworthy, *shudder*….

That is a bad thing…

Maelinar Maelinar 2:36 pm 09 Aug 05

Off to Holdsworthy for LG!

(Army joke)

Is it that VG is a pig, or is a member of the police force ?

I don’t think that any other members of the police force would have been insulted at your very direct comments LG 🙂

LurkerGal LurkerGal 1:59 pm 09 Aug 05

For info have tried to edit post with “pig” in it. It was childish and I only wanted to offend VG, not any other police who someone might reasonably be expected to actually have some respect for.

LurkerGal LurkerGal 1:52 pm 09 Aug 05

VG just because you are a pig doesn’t mean you always know the truth, ok? I remember last year when you shot me down in flames and said that I was wrong, and gave a different scenario. It turned out *I* was right, and you were wrong.

Maelinar Maelinar 8:11 am 09 Aug 05

Is it just me then that as a taxpayer is feeling a little bit underrepresented at the moment ?

I’m getting the curious tingling down my back that tells me that my taxes are being wasted on shit. And I don’t like shit.

richard richard 9:24 pm 08 Aug 05

I’m going with the “cock-up over conspiracy” option here. I’ve heard of this sort of thing happening, and not just once. In a sense, the problem is that all of the cameras share one storage system (apparently). They have a single point of failure, that failed.

I know of an enormous bank’s main trading room collapsing in on itself… Did they know why? Not likely, the disk was full on their logging system. Now consider the banks pay the best money in town for their nerds (by a HUGE margin), and the AFP is in the middle of the road at best. The banks generally understand technology, and the cops (or ACT gov. if you prefer) are generally coming to terms with typewriters…

Basically, someone in the system sucks at their job. It’s only news because attention was drawn to their crapness by the death of an innocent.

Thumper Thumper 9:11 pm 08 Aug 05

Apparently the kid that was charged found a public phone when the car was dumped and then called 000.

okay, it doesn’t help much but it does mean that this kid has some sort of conscience.

I believe he may have been 13. What the hell was he doing in civic at that time. Charge the parents as well for neglect.

Kerces Kerces 9:06 pm 08 Aug 05

Nope G, the high speed pursuit part of this story’s got 123 (at the moment anyway). But if you take this one and that one to be the same thing then…


Special G Special G 9:01 pm 08 Aug 05

Mael, I guess you took a couple of days off. The Police didn’t outsource the contract, the ACT government installed the cameras, then put the system in place with the Police to monitor it.

There are some links to Police pursuit data found on the web on the last article if anyone is still following it.

Is this the most comments on a subject that Riotact has ever had?


Kerces Kerces 8:42 pm 08 Aug 05

One of the passengers in the car has pleaded guilty to being in the car in the Children’s court today (ABC report here).

The boy driving the car hasn’t entered a plea and the other passenger hasn’t faced court yet.


Maelinar Maelinar 1:31 pm 08 Aug 05

Having had a refreshing weekend away from this conversation I note that there is an assumption going that the police are some sort of self-supporting organisation that is accountable to nobody but themselves ?

Get real. They are here for us, paid by us, to do what we want them to do.

If we want them to track down criminals, then so be it, let the dog off the leash, if we want them to tell us why a CCTV unit that has been placed in a position for public safety was inoperational, they had better come up with the answer.

If they had outsourced the responsibility, I want to know why that company got the tender, and I want to know what is being done to ensure that the company is meeting it’s obligations.

Since last time I checked, the Police were still responsible for public safety. If they’ve lost that ideal, then perhaps it’s time for them to be reminded of their obligations.

johnboy johnboy 9:29 pm 07 Aug 05

OK, so there was a pursuit. Thanks

All we wanted to know.

Special G Special G 2:51 pm 07 Aug 05

Add to last I read another account of what happened in the paper yesterday when the bloke said Police were 5-10 seconds behind the other vehicle. Some people could cover the distance from London Cct to where she got hit running in 10 seconds.


Special G Special G 2:49 pm 07 Aug 05

Serve and protect is crap that is dished out on American television shows. It is an expectation that is generated through that medium.

If I was to believe everything that happened on television I would be getting fingerprints off a woolen jumper and having the bad guys caught within the hour.

Then given our population size compared to Mount Thomas the Police would be having rolling shootouts with criminals conducting well organised gold heists through the bus interchange every second day.

Then people jump up and down and say “we pay your bills.” So does every other bugger who pays taxes. Including me – so I tend to look at it as I pay my own bills.

I would have expected better of an educated person like yourself JB than to come up with a comment like that one.

Its the type of crap that is generally said by some pissed idiot that has just got locked up for being a knob in public on the sauce.

No Police ever FORCED a high speed pursuit. Most people just pull over to the left side of the road and stop the car when hailed by Police. Others CHOSE to run…

Police work with the tools they are given if that happens to be a system that ‘an year 11 comp sci student would be ashamed of’ then that is what they deal with.

And I am guessing you didn’t pick the sarcasm when I was talking about the cameras from Tandy.


johnboy johnboy 11:24 am 07 Aug 05

BTW, too much Law and Order for some, ’serve and protect’ only appears on the sides of American Police cars

I’ve got some bad news for you VG, but that’s the standard the public expect from you, and while you may hold us in contempt we actually pay your bills.

Keep up that attitude and the victorian police force keeps looking better and better next time the contract is up for renewal.

El. given the competence, compassion, and honesty displayed by the AFP so far do you realise just how little an internal investigation reassures?

The issue the police want to talk about is the kids in the car. People have been charged, well done.

The issue the public is talking about is why the police keep changing their stories in a highly suspicious manner and have an evidence retention program (in the form of the CCTV storage), which a year 11 comp sci student would be ashamed of, that has manifestly failed.

el el 11:06 am 07 Aug 05

FORCING them to go through a shared zone?


I think some of you need to take off the tin-foil hats and realise that an investigation IS taking place into this tragedy.

vg vg 10:33 am 07 Aug 05

BTW, too much Law and Order for some, ‘serve and protect’ only appears on the sides of American Police cars

vg vg 10:12 am 07 Aug 05

The car could have proceeded straight ahead towards Northbourne but turned right, of its own volition, into the interchange. The only way to ‘force’ it into the interchange would have been to ram it into it, or put up a road block to force it to do so. It should be pretty clear to everyone that neither happened (unless of course they managed to set up a road block in the 5 secs it took for the offending vehicle to travel from o/s the Assembly building to the interchange turn off)

Samuel Gordon-Stewart Samuel Gordon-Stewart 12:51 am 07 Aug 05

Actually, it is interesting to notice the absence of the words “Serve and Protect” from the police cars, signs, etc.

Johnboy is right, we shouldn’t need to work for them to understand them. It’s not exactly democratic for the police to not be accoutable for thier actions, and the only way they can be accoutable is if we understand their investigational procedures.

Sure, they had the job of bringing the juvenile car theives to justice, but forcing them to go through a “shared zone” (according to the signs) at high speed would be irresponsible, and that is why we need the footage, the allegation is there and it needs to be openly investigated.

If they didn’t force a high-speed chase through a shared zone, then it was obviously entirely the fault of the car theives. If, on the other hand, the police were in hot pursuit, then they are at least partially to blame for the accident.

« Previous 1 3 4 5

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter


Search across the site