Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Aidan Brufort Bruford to face four charges of property damage

johnboy 21 April 2005 53

ABC Online are reporting that former Advisor to the Chief Minister (and soon to be employee of the Chief Minister’s Department if the CM is to be believed), Aidan Brufort, is going to be charged by police for his spray stencilling ways.

ACT Policing has now confirmed Mr Bruford has been served with a summons to report to the ACT Magistrate’s court next Wednesday.

He will face a total of four charges of property damage.

Can our police contingent confirm if this sort of delay (he was caught on 07-APR-05) is normal?


What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
53 Responses to
Aidan Brufort Bruford to face four charges of property damage
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
1
Apocalypse 1:29 pm 21 Apr 05

if JB does it, ill join him, but only on the condition that i can carry around a sign in protest simply saying stanhope=dickhead from our very own stencil..

RandomC*nt 1:23 pm 21 Apr 05

I’m not sure that anyone ‘expects’ anything from anyone. I think we are taught what to expect by a ravenous and vindictive group of braindead media hacks and politicians who are obsessed with nothing more than their own egos and petty squabbles. What has amazed me about this issue is the way in which the media – including WIN, The Australian (editorial space for chrissakes!), the Daily Telegraph and The ABC – and the Federal Government, showed such clear intent to destroy an individual for such a minor crime. It shocks me that anyone can seriously think about this in the context of other things that have happened and are currently happening in federal and territory politics and still be outraged by it.

RandomC*nt 1:17 pm 21 Apr 05

But remember, mr. Evil, it’s people like Aidan who give embittered people like you the oppotunity to come onto websites like this and puke your fetid green bile all over the place, in an attempt to relieve that painful cramp in your guts that just won’t go away…

RandomGit 1:16 pm 21 Apr 05

@C*nt, yes, it does alter my view. I assume charges where a warning is the usual thing. I’ll be happy to take your word for it for now.

So the next question, does his public position mean we expect better behaviour from him than a teenager and therefore the result is just? I submit that that would be discrimination.

Mr Evil 1:11 pm 21 Apr 05

If Aidan hadn’t been a stupid jerk by going around spraying crap on walls, then none of this would have happened, and he would still be Jon’s little office boy.

RandomC*nt 1:03 pm 21 Apr 05

Does the clarification not alter your views? Do you not see that Aidan has been triply punished (loss of job, charges, character assassination)? And as for me needing to calm down, well, I will when people get to grips with the fact that this has been a disgraceful, embarrassing example of the interworkings of politics, law and the media in this country.

RandomGit 12:55 pm 21 Apr 05

@C*nt, thanks for the clarification, it’s all I asked for. My statement was a summary from a variety of comments made in various places. I think I made it clear that I was unsure of it’s complete validity. Take a prozac and calm down.

RandomC*nt 12:51 pm 21 Apr 05

Ah, yes, ‘bias’, as opposed to the studied objectivity and neutrality of your fine self bonfire. Are you really prepared to declare this a ‘major property offence’? If you think so, you should get out more often.

bonfire 12:43 pm 21 Apr 05

minor property offence ?

excuse me sir, i believe your bias is undone.

to teh tune of learys ‘asshole’
v a n d a l
he’s a vandal a repeat offender vandal…

Mong-On 12:43 pm 21 Apr 05

Goddamnit who the hell are you people? No, don’t answer, I fear I might be sick: you’ve already pushed this guy to the point where he’s had no option to quit his job (and lose his livelihood – this is no small thing) and you’re still not satisfied?

You slavering hounds on this website should instead question the professionalism of the AFP who leaked this story to the media in the first place.

The real point here is that we’re living in a po-lice state where anyone who dares to criticise the war in Iraq will feel the full wrath of the powers that be. They will use any tool at their disposal (AFP, DPP, the media, shills on this website) to maintain the figleaf that this war is right or somehow just.

Anyone else would have been let off with a caution. Keep it REAL, idiots.

RandomC*nt 12:33 pm 21 Apr 05

You may also have noticed that the NSW planning Minister, Craig Knowles, got a six month driving ban and a fine for drink driving last month. All well and good, very dangerous and stupid thing to do. Did he lose his job? No. Was there massive public hysteria? No. Only in the pea-brained, coddled, “I voted for a dragway”, Canberra public mind would a little political stencil be considered a major public issue.

RandomC*nt 12:23 pm 21 Apr 05

The ‘usual’ process, RandomGit, would be the issuing of a caution in the case of a first minor property offence such as this. No charges, no summons. It’s amazing that you think the AFP, Johnny’s troop of attack dogs, would treat Aidan leniently because of political pressure. The reverse is true.

RandomGit 12:11 pm 21 Apr 05

The issue I think is charged, no summoned. He wasn’t charged at the time, only once the political pressure was removed in his favour. But now the pressure has been reapplied against him, he has been charged and the brief and summons have been fast tracked to fruition.

This is based on earlier reports during the furore that charges were not laid, even days after the offence. I imagine the moment I get caught doing that stuff it’s striaght down the cop shop and charges laid in a matter of hours.

Feel free to lay out the ‘usual’ process correctly if I’m wrong.

TAD 12:05 pm 21 Apr 05

Delay my arse.

This has to be the quickest summons service since Kev Buzzacott (Aboriginal Tent Embassy – Coat of arms theft).

A summons usually takes 6-8 weeks to be sworn and served from the time the brief goes in which is usually a good few weeks (at least) from the offence.

Mr Evil 10:19 am 21 Apr 05

Firing squad? Hang the little shit!

David Heidelberg 9:40 am 21 Apr 05

I want to see JB out the front of the court demanding death by firing squad!!

RandomGit 9:15 am 21 Apr 05

In defence of the AFP they get a lot of pressure, up to and including threats against family, over political issues. Once the political obstacle was broken they were free to do their job, which they would have been preparing for all the while.

Ralph 8:53 am 21 Apr 05

My money’s on six months.

Thumper 8:12 am 21 Apr 05

About time, but in defence of the AFP it would seem they were gathering a little more evidence, to wit, photos of other efforts by my Brufort.

Not that it will make any difference. I reckon at tops a two year good behaviour bond.

Ralph 7:44 am 21 Apr 05

I’m taking bets on how short the good behaviour bond will be. Money back if he appears before Terrance Higgins.

1

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2019 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site