2 July 2024

What year is it and what territory are we living in again?

| Chris Johnson
Join the conversation
69
Man standing behind pool fence

ACT Policing was called when Tuck was noticed by a neighbour near his complex’s pool. He was arrested and then unarrested. Photo: Michelle Kroll.

Canberra – the capital city of Australia full of enlightened academics, progressive public servants and woke warriors, right?

After all, we collectively voted yes in the Voice referendum and were the only jurisdiction to do so.

But let’s not congratulate ourselves too much, too fast.

What happened to a 38-year-old black man in Narrabundah last Thursday (27 June) should be cause to make us collectively hang our heads in shame.

As reported by Region yesterday (1 July), an Australian citizen, who happened to be born in Zimbabwe, was arrested at his own home because police and a nosy neighbour couldn’t countenance the possibility that a man like him could live in a place like that.

It’s a nice townhouse complex with a pool and barbeque area on a quiet, leafy street in a peaceful neighbourhood.

That’s apparently not somewhere a black man should be ‘loitering’ in the middle of a weekday.

Tuck and his family only moved into the complex two months ago, from just down the road in Red Hill.

He is highly educated, with two master’s and two bachelor’s degrees, and is employed at a well-respected health advocacy group.

Tuck is a researcher and policy adviser.

READ ALSO Prime Minister slams ‘unworthy’ perpetrators behind graffiti attacks on Canberra war memorials

Tuck is his nickname and all he wants to be known by right now for fear of retribution because some self-appointed king of the complex, middle-aged white guy confronted him about being near the pool where he didn’t “belong”.

Tuck stood his ground and refused to give in to this stranger’s demands to hand over his address details or leave.

Then the police arrived.

Five male officers in three vehicles, no less. What kind of crime attracts that kind of police attention?

When Tuck stood his ground with the police, protesting his innocence while showing them the keys to his home and to the pool, he was arrested – hands cuffed behind his back while being ushered into a police van while officers searched his home.

I’ve been in Tuck’s townhouse and saw what the police would have seen – a beautiful and tidy home with all the signs of a young family enjoying books, music and good food together.

Police “unarrested” Tuck and left without apology.

We can dress this up any way we want, but this all indicates that racism is alive and well in the capital; mostly on display from the know-it-all neighbour, but the police are by no means blameless.

None of this would have happened if Tuck was a white man.

Just ask the residents of Watson and Downer, who have been contemplating vigilante justice because they can’t get police to act on the spate of break-ins, robberies and anti-social drug-related behaviour perpetrated by a ring of low-life white men.

Public services across most jurisdictions have ramped up talk and action on cultural awareness and sensitivities.

READ ALSO NTEU calls for inquiry into ‘industrial-scale’ university wage theft set to hit $380m

The Australian Public Service is making great and positive advances (check out its social cohesion programs).

So, too, most ACT Government directorates and agencies.

However, police are apparently in need of much more training in this area. Training to understand that a black African man who raises his voice a little in frustration at being wrongly accused of a crime is not displaying aggression towards them.

It’s not belligerence. It’s how an innocent man knows how to declare his innocence.

Training, too, to understand that when a white man calls them to say a black man is loitering around the pool, the white man making the call might well be racially motivated.

And training in the basic common sense that walking from one’s living room, through one’s own carport to an adjoining grassy area for some relaxation doesn’t usually involve carrying photo ID with you.

At least not in Australia.

Tuck was (and still is) actually recovering from an emergency hospital stay over heart issues.

Witnesses living in the complex have talked to Region and expressed their disgust at what went down last Thursday and what an innocent man was dealt by the hands of a neighbour and the police.

This kind of thing happens in Australia’s “other” territory – it doesn’t happen in the ACT. Not in 2024

The Canberra bubble just burst.

Join the conversation

69
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

which he did, to police who did not believe him, arrested him and searched his home.
you might think its a long bow to draw what the neighbouts intentions were. Just as it is a long bow to say Tucks response was to assume a victims mentality. Or are you saying he acted a victim only because he was black?

If you are used to being wrongly accused of things you haven’t done, a defensive response may come naturally. People who are minorities in a majority culture are often misjudged and targeted or accused of wrongdoing when they’re just doing what others do. Police should understand that, else they’ve not been trained properly. They should be more open to understanding that and listening, rather than jumping to conclusions based on an accusation.

It is about time the ACT government tore up its contract with the AFP and employed its own police force. A police force that will be accountable and answerable to our city and its citizens. ACT Policing comes under federal jurisdiction with every Australian state having its own police force except the ACT. The current lack of accountability and transparency inherent in our city’s policing does not provide proper legal oversight or accountability for ACT residents that our citizens desire or expect.

Despicably, the ACT police minister has no day-to-day oversight of Territory policing. Our police force is also exempt from the ACT’s Integrity Commission investigations. There are a number of ACT police investigations currently underway. This includes charges which were laid against two NRL players late last year being dismissed when it was revealed police had lied under oath. With police investigating police it is highly unlikely that the findings of these investigations will ever be released or any other of its investigations.

Negative press and ongoing criticisms from the government and leading members of the legal profession continue to be on the rise. In particular, questioning the ethical standards of ACT Policing’s leadership and its senior force. Lack of knowledge and training, entrenched police sexism and bullying, heavy handed and aggressive tactics when making arrests, failing victims of sexual assault, police lying under cross-examination, knowingly breaching privacy laws, putting prosecutions at risk, leaking of a complainant’s personal and confidential information to the press in a high-profile rape case, a lack of transparency in internal investigations and rewarding of bad behaviour are just some of the many criticisms and complaints levelled against our police and its leadership.

When will it end?

Go ahead and tear it up. Then we can all resort to this level of vigilante justice and trial by media we have now. I commend Tuck for going through the appropriate channels and lodging a complaint against the AFP. However he has not done himself any favours by going to the media and any court proceedings would likely be compromised by such reckless action.

I’ll also add that Tuck has not made a formal complaint of racism against his neighbour and the police have stated there was no wrongdoing on their part. So case closed, end of story there was no racism involved unless the investigation against the officers’ actions find otherwise. But the neighbour is in the clear!

Sam Oak, under what Section of what Act does one make a complaint of ”racism”? Did you mean (despite not having a clue) unfair or discriminatory treatment or racial hatred?

A lack of mention of witnesses implies it would be futile for either police or Tuck to pursue the neighbour while it remains a one-off event. It is fantasy to declare the neighbour “in the clear” on that basis, although they may be so legally. It is also ridiculous to pretend police might be absolved from internal investigation because the matter is in the press. No courts are involved.

It has been remarkable how much you have had to say about things of which you evidently know so little, and the nature of the tropes and untruths you have used while saying it.

Sam, Jack hasn’t said on tearing up the contract with the AFP the community should then resort to vigilante justice as you have implied. He has said the ACT needs its own police force accountable to the ACT Integrity Commission and ACT Police Minister.

I live in a complex where there is an older white male who harrasses, women, non causican males and people from the queer community. He has been doing it for years!! People don’t have to have done anything to him!
I didn’t tell him what apartment I lived in when I was in the secure underground carpark about to park. He told me he could find out anyway and I have been harassed since.
Yes, I have been to the police. I just do not have enough for an AVO

Where is the funding going to come from for a local police force? And why would the protocols and rules of engagement going to be any different to the AFP. Do you honestly think there would have been a difference in outcome?

And cool story about the harasser in your apartment but it’s all irrelevant to the issue. Maybe gather more evidence such as private recordings of the guy if it requires an AVO?

I admire your strident and desperate efforts Sam Oak to turn this latest example of heavy handed and aggressive behaviour by officers of ACT Policing into something less ominous than what it actually was. But let’s face facts, this was a blatant racist act. Cruising around on patrol when the incident was reported, five (white) male police officers converged on an upmarket townhouse complex in leafy North Canberra in three police cars. Puffed up and fitted out with guns after receiving the report from a nosy, and reportedly racist resident, that a man was loitering near the complainant’s apartment’s pool.

Instead of making discreet inquiries to ascertain the facts of the complaint as one would expect, they reached conclusions based on the man’s racial appearance, surmising that he was up to no good.

I am glad that Tuck’s family did not witness the indignity of seeing their loved one and parent being bullied, handcuffed and bundled into a police van by a bunch of burly police officers. I am also pleased to see that all media outlets are reporting this incident including the ABC news, as they should.

Of course after another internal investigation the police have dismissed the incident rejecting any wrongdoing on their part. This is just another example of ACT Policing and their lack of accountability and transparency when carrying out investigations which is inherent in the force!

We’d use the funding we now use to pay for the AFP community policing, but we’d have some accountability because they’d answer to us, not to the Feds.

Sam, these comments are ridiculous and irrelevant as well as misinformed. You’re just stirring the pot as usual, but from a rather bizarre perspective not based in reality

Those claiming racist motivations need to just read the sign in the photo. It clearly states “visitors are only permitted if accompanied by a resident”! Imagine if you worked at a bank and someone you didn’t recognised walked into an area marked “staff only”. You ask sorry sir, but do you work here and can I see some ID. They refuse to cooperate and asks for your ID. There is only one way that kind of interaction can play out!

The fact that the police have come out with a statement that no racial discrimination occurred and that this article is flagged “Opinion” means that it is nothing more than bait to spark public outrage. If I were Tuck I’d recommend he go to court over this matter if he truly believes he was racially vilified!

@Sam Oak
Tuck is, and was at the time, a resident. Your reference to the sign and the rest of your post is relevant. End of story.

Ahhuh Sam, the sign clearly states “visitors are only permitted if accompanied by a resident so where is the proof of residency by the racist “neighbour”. Works both ways doesn’t it.

Your example of an off-limits area in a bank doesn’t correlate at all to a pool area in an apartment complex.
Regardless, the question of racism aside, if there were any AirBnB apartments in the complex that neighbour would have their work cut out for them asking every new face for ID. Common-sense must apply – if they have a pool key it’s OK for them to be there.

Voting ‘Yes’ to the voice showed me that Canberra is full of racists that want a two tier society.

Ken the ACT was the only jurisdiction that returned a “yes” majority vote. And of course there is a clearly established relationship between the “no” voters and racism which means Australia is a majority racist country?

So the many Aboriginal people who voted “no” are racists? Or they simply saw something that creates division and affords people different rights based on their skin colour?

The policy was the very definition of racism, and its supporters clearly racist, in spite of convincing themselves otherwise.

A lot of the comments here are conveniently made through the prism of white eyes.

As an old WASC (being a left-footer, I fail on the “P”rotestant) woke male, I can honestly say that I have never felt discrimination against me. People may have directed slurs at me on occasion, referencing my skin my colour (a la “Captain Cook”, etc) or, of late, my seniority, but it was “water off a duck’s back”, as it was not something that I have repeatedly endured nor found particularly hurtful.

Also in my dealings with police, it has always been cordial and other than being asked for my driver licence in my vehicle for appropriate reasons, I don’t recall being asked to produce ID by police.

I have lived in several multi-occupant complexes over the years, many with shared facilities – maybe a gym, community centre or swimming pool. I have never been challenged by anyone, when accessing such facilities, to justify my presence in the location. If they had, and assuming the approach was cordial, then I probably would have introduced myself and advised I had just moved in. I suspect that would have been the sum total of the exchange.

I have a feeling that Tuck probably hasn’t had that same “water off a duck’s back” experience or feeling, during his life – because it’s likely a lot of angst towards him has probably been due to his skin colour. So maybe there’s a good reason why he is playing the racially profiled victim card?

It’s very easy to say “why didn’t he …?” or “I would have …” or “It’s not about his skin colour, it’s about the situation” when we have the luxury of seeing this incident through that prism of white eyes. Not so easy when you have actually endured racial discrimination.

I, for one, can’t empathise with him as my life’s experience has been totally different to Tuck’s, but I can certainly feel sympathy for the shoddy way he was treated by both his “neighbour” (perhaps inquisitor may be more appropropriate) and the police – irrespective of how the “incident” was conveyed to them (police).

“White eyes”?
They are still human eyes, Herr JS.

Maybe cool it with the racist “white guilt” attempt.

@Ken M
My apologies if my comment has caused you to feel uncomfortable.

Aaaahh Ken, that is where you are wrong! Not everyone on this planet looks at a person through human eyes. Many see us and them, race, religion, sex…

“full of enlightened academics [etc]” and yet barely one of them can think that no mention of Tuck’s race came from the neighbour or police, making it ludicrous to suppose this had anything to do with that.

Vasily, are all potentially racist behaviours preceded by verbally marking the racial difference beforehand?

Either of your possible responses shows your comment to be ludicrous, one way or the other.

Stephen Saunders12:54 pm 02 Jul 24

What year is it? About 10 years past the use-by date for Police Minister Gentleman.

The ACT needs its own, fit-for-purpose community police service that works within the jurisdiction of the ACT Integrity Commission and under the terms of the ACT Human Rights Act. It’s time to ditch the AFP contract which continues to deliver sub-standard policing.

Whilst there may well have been a racial component to this incident, particularly from the neighbour, the extrapolation and assumptions being made here about it are over the top.

Particularly when claiming this wouldn’t have happened to a “white man”, or the repeated mention of his education, employment and social status seemingly as if it means he should have received better treatment. Arguing against baseless racism and discrimination whilst employing it yourself, seems to be a weird position to take.

Apparently he has video of part of the incident, publish it so people can have a slightly more informed view, rather than the current jumping to conclusions that seems to be occurring.

I agree chewy but it’s also a long bow to draw that the neighbour’s intentions were racially motivated. We don’t know the full set of circumstances. A resident of the apartment complex has the right to ask any individual that acts suspiciously whether they have a right to be there. Instead of cooperating and telling them where he lived, Tuck immediately acted defensively and assumed a victim’s mentally. If I were the one being asked, simply telling the neighbour where I lived would have defused the situation!

Well yeah but to be fair, even if he posted a video, we’d just be seeing the part of the interaction that he wanted to make public; If he was being aggressive or belligerent during part of the video, do you think he’d be making that part public?

What I would really like to see is the police cameras showing the start to the end of the interaction. Without seeing the whole story, it’s just hearsay.

Sam,
I agree that we don’t know the resident’s intentions either. Has any of the reporters attempted to find out? Don’t know that either.

Bob,
yes I agree with that also, if there’s additional information available that provides better context, it would help, including the police footage (if any). I was just saying that there is apparently video that the author’s of these pieces have seen and it would obviously provide some additional information that is currently unavailable to readers.

peturbed_but_pretty1:41 pm 02 Jul 24

Sam, you seem to be going against your own advice and assuming that Tuck immediately acted defensively and assumed a victim’s mentality, even though we haven’t seen any evidence of that (or the contrary)

Pertubed nope I am simply making that assessment based on the facts we are told (which again is Tuck’s side of the story). He has admitted that when asked whether he had a right to be there he refused to tell the neighbour where he lived.

Sure he has a right not to say. But being black doesn’t preclude you from being cooperative and friendly either. If I was in that situation as a middle-aged white man, I’d understand that as a male in proximity to a pool where children and other women are around, it might raise questions for me to linger in the area. So I’d do everything in my power to try and ease those concerns. It had nothing to do with race (not brought up by the police or the neighbour) but explicitly raised by Tuck as the issue (and hence the victim mentality).

Sam Oak – could you explain what is suspicious about sitting by the poolside of your own apartment complex. Also, what right did the white-skinned racist neighbour have to be there? And what right did the white-skinned racist neighbour have to ask another resident why they are there?

Astro, any resident has a right to ask another individual that they don’t recognise if they have a right to be hanging around their place of residence. That is irrespective of race. Had Tuck had any social skills he would have explained he lived there and the neighbour would have said me too and they would have shared a beer together. For this one incident where Tuck acted in a manner that drew suspicion and escalated the situation, I’m sure there are a hundred others where communicating civilly would have defused the tension and resolved the misunderstanding.

Sam Oak, please point out to me any mention of “children and other women” in either of the Riotact articles? You have said it three times now. Why would this be important anyway, when a non-white man is standing around? Sounds like an old American racist trope to me.

If there were “other” women, who was the first one? We know Tuck is male and the article describes the initial inquirer as male. Were you worried about one or more of the police who turned up later?

You have also on a couple of occasions said that Tuck could politely have said where he lived. On that enquiry, he asked his interlocutor where did he live, which the latter refused to answer, so why should Tuck? You are not taking a one-sided view, are you?

By the way, I commend you on your keenness for even minor potential incidents to be reported to the police, although, I do not recall you having the same enthusiasm in another thread where the topic was domestic coercion or violence.

How are your standards going there?

Obviously Sam you’ve never lived in a strata development. You tell the stickybeaks nothing. Seeing someone in a common area is not a reason to question anyone or call the police. These places are an attraction for the know it all and like to make the rules and pretend they run the show and have the right to every one’s business. The person involved no doubt is a person of low self esteem and without anything in life going for them other than their sheriff duty at what they consider their property. Only a fool would give up the information in this situation to someone you don’t know and don’t know what their intentions are with this information.

No Sam, you don’t seem to get the point here. You don’t have the right to make a false complaint to police based on your perceptions of another person’s “race”. The person that did this should be fined for making a false complaint based on no evidence. You’ve also made claims based on no evidence that a person was acting suspiciously when they quite clearly weren’t. Racism is a very pernicious attribute, and the article shows clearly how pernicious it is. I think the classic line “Mind your own business” applies n this instance.

Astro read the sign in the photo which clearly says “visitors are only allowed if accompanied by a resident”! it doesn’t say report any black visitors who are unaccompanied. It says report ANY visitors. The neighbour was simply following the rules. Remove the sign if you believe it is inappropriate to question an individual about their being in such an area! It has nothing to do with race!

” It says report ANY visitors.”

Sam Oak, where does the sign say “Report any visitors.”?

You may add that to the other questions you have failed to answer.

which he did, to police who did not believe him, arrested him and searched his home.
you might think its a long bow to draw what the neighbouts intentions were. Just as it is a long bow to say Tucks response was to assume a victims mentality. Or are you saying he acted a victim only because he was black?

Somebody please share the magic words that will get 5 officers in 3 patrol cars to show up!

That’s the part that makes me seriously question the validity to his side of the story. You call the cops and say, “I think there’s a trespasser that doesn’t live here” and you may get a single car turn up two hours later.

I really want to hear what the original interaction before the cops were called was… and not just one side of the story before I make up my mind either way.

I’ve seen six cops in three cars turn up a very minor incident which did not warrant such attention. I asked one of them why and the response was basically they had nothing else going on and were in the area.

Heywood Smith1:15 pm 02 Jul 24

You did not ask, and if you did, they would have not responded in that manner… People and their imaginations.

Sam Oak i can tell you from first had experience that when there was a drunk guy, who thought he was at his mates place, turn up at my house, i called the cops and there were 4 cops in 3 cars turn up to that. so yes it can happen. Glad you dont let the facts get in the way of your pathetic agenda.

The year is 2024 where every victim of alleged racial vilification goes to the media to do interviews and garner public sympathy. There used to be a time when these processes played out in the courtroom as part of an ongoing investigation.

Now we only get one side of the story all packaged as news and “fact”! Where is the statement from the police, what does the body cam footage show. And ridiculous to say we can’t report suspicious activity. He was clearly being uncooperative because he had a victim mentality from the start. We don’t know if there were other women or children around. I would have reported him to the police regardless of his race.

So where is the explanation from the racist white neighbour? That person has wasted the time of our police force because of their racism. What level of intelligence (and, sadly, racists aren’t know for their cognitive abilities) decides to call the police with a hysterical claim about a resident sitting around the pool of their own (shared) property? What sort of neighbour would not come up and introduce themselves and commence a conversation in a friendly way with another neighbour before deciding that they should or shouldn’t be there. And the level of intelligence of some of the fellow travellers posting on this article unfortunately proves the article writer’s claim. Yes, very sad, 2024 in the ACT.

Lol Astro, it sounds like you were there and witnessed the whole thing. Why should the neighbour have to come forward? We don’t know their gender or racial background. They could be Arabic, Chinese or Indian for all we know. If actual racial discrimination did occur why is Tuck not taking this matter to court? Why does he feel the need to publicise the matter so there can be a trial by media and the situation can be judged by keyboard warriors like yourself?

Astro,
can you not see the flaws in your own position based on the actual level of information provided? You’ve made a number of big assumptions around what occurred and individual’s motivations based on not even half the story.

Yes, where is the explanation from the neighbour? Was it even sought? The police have already given an explanation that doesn’t align with the claim so they don’t agree. Where does the truth sit?

You’re actually providing a perfect example of what I was talking about in my comment above, making definitive statements with very incomplete information.

Sam, why would you have reported him? He wasn’t doing anything wrong. Also, how do you know he “had a victim mentality”? And thirdly, how would you have reacted if you were confronted by five armed police on your own property who wouldn’t listen when you tried to tell them you lived there?

Based on the “actual level of information provided” there is no evidence that the racist “reporter” is a resident so where is your evidence of that?

Astro,
What on earth is that word salad meant to mean?

At least try and post something mildly coherent if you want to address the points made.

Sorry you’re having trouble understanding a fairly simple sentence. It appears that you have no evidence that the person who called the police was actually a resident. Thanks for confirming.

Astro2,
What?

Where have I claimed definitively that the person who called the police was a resident?

I’ve said we don’t have enough information to know what happened, with incomplete and conflicting stories.

You called the person who called police “a neighbour” in your own comments, so perhaps you should be asking yourself the question?

Very strange indeed to see someone arguing against their own statements though.

But thanks for proving my point, we have very little verified information on what actually happened, so it would be very presumptive to make definitive statements like in the article and you yourself have made.

Glad you now agree.

a) because they wasted police time and taxpayers’ money.
b) at this stage we are not aware of further proceedings but it’s likely an option where a false arrest has been made.
c) it’s not for you to decide whether the matter should or should not be discussed in a public forum. If you don’t want to participate, then, by all means don’t.

You referred to the person who called the police as “a neighbour”. However there is no proof that the person was a neighbour, a resident or someone who was or was not, entitled to be there. So the question remains, what right did that person have to call the police and on what basis was the call made.

Astro,
none of that is really relevant but thanks/sorry that you feel that way.

Once again, I can’t see where I’ve suggested the matter shouldn’t be discussed, I’ve suggested that care should be taken in making definitive statements with incomplete information.

But you seemingly want to double down on it in your most recent comments, when you are clearly just guessing. You don’t know what happened or the individual motivations of those people involved, it’s not that hard to grasp.

Running in all guns blazing with incomplete information just makes you look silly.

I would also make a point around the “neighbour” or complainant. The police statement references talking to them when they arrived at the address, so they have been identified through that process unless the police are making it up. Again, further information would assist, but either it isn’t available or the questions weren’t asked.

Which is the entire point.

I suggest if you are making comment on people “running in all guns blazing” you should check back on some of the comments on this thread about “suspicious behaviour” and the rights of bigots to demand ID from anyone they don’t like. It’s a bit sad to see you condoning, by your statements, some of the racist comments appearing on this thread. TBH Chewy i thought better of you.

Astro,
I suggest you stop making stuff up.

Nowhere do my statements, either implicitly or explicitly, condone any other comments who have taken a similar presumptive approach.

It is clear that I do not support any such assertions, the entire point being the lack of available and verified information from which to make such definitive statements, which starts with this article itself.

I didn’t think it would be possible for you to give me any better examples of my point but you keep excelling in your willingness to jump to (unsupported) conclusions.

Well done.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.