Assaulting Police. Libs move to toughen penalties.

Hope Ace had a word with the ‘friend’ after the court case

vg said :

“and paid all my fines”

Scratch my last, you’re a BS artist

Seems to have a lot of control over his partner too ….. but thats the fault of police too I suppose. Funny with these people it is always someone else’s fault. First it was his partners fault, then the friend of the partner, then it was the police. How dare they make him accountable for his actions.

“and paid all my fines”

Scratch my last, you’re a BS artist

Som aceofspades, were the offences proven against you? I’m guessing yes, but it was all a great conspiracy, wasn’t it

While I admire the Libs sentiments in reality this will make no difference unless the judiciary strats handing out stronger sentences, therefore it is ultimately pointless.

KeenGolfer said :

aceofspades said :

Including the lazy old pen pushing station officers. What is the average age of general duties officers on the beat?

The figures quoted were from ACT Policing, that’s general duties. There are no “lazy old pen pushing station officers”. There’s an officer in command of the station, and almost every one else in the station is “on the beat”.

It sounds like you were involved in a family violence incident, for which the AFP is pro-arrest. It’s not uncommon for women, even with obvious injuries, to deny to police that anything has taken place. Most people would be surprised at how many family violence incidents police attend.

Handcuffing is never “forced” unless the person being handcuffed is resisting arrest or non-compliant. If the person is compliant it’s very easy and there is certainly no force required. I think you’re not telling the full story.

Family violence may include, but is not limited to, criminal behaviours such as:

•assault (for example slapping, punching, kicking, grabbing, pushing)
•threats to physically harm a person
•confining a person against their will, etc

http://www.police.act.gov.au/community-safety/abuse-and-family-violence.aspx

Believe what you like, quote whatever you like. Yes I resisted police, there was never any physical violence between me and my then de facto. She was drunk, and a friend of hers heard over the phone an argument we were having about her going out all night and leaving me to look after three young children. The friend then rang police. They attended the premises and took one look at me and one look at her with children and without asking me anything about the situation insisted on taking me away. They kept asking her if she was in fear of her life and she kept repeating no she wasn’t. I kept trying to tell them that she had a alcohol problem and they were not interested in hearing what I had to say they were only interested in hearing her say that she was in fear of her life. The officers were asked to leave by both my de facto and I but refused. In court a completely different story was produced. Obviously both officers told an identical story and produced notebooks that were never present saying they had asked my de facto if she was in fear of her life and that she had said yes. They claimed that furniture had been pulled over and smashed in a scuffle with me but of course this never happened either. We watched both officers sink their heads to the ground as my de facto stood in court and said exactly what I had been trying to tell them that she had an alcohol problem. I was pinned to the ground and hand cuffed so tightly that blood circulation was lost and nerve damage was done. The nurse who tested my nerves also said that it was not uncommon for this damage to be done by police handcuffs. A restraining order which we totally ignored was forced on us by police against both our wills. My charges were resist police and assault police. I have never had anything to do with police or domestic violence since but the end story is the same. I don’t trust police officers as I have watched them lie standing in court and I have watched them manufacture evidence. They came into my home and assaulted me. They brought on my dislike for them themselves. This was many years ago and is pretty well my only experience with police but my despise for them remains. My de facto was hugely apologetic over the situation and paid all my fines and expenses but the whole situation was a huge drain on family resources. Police did not help us in any way shape or form, they only caused much grief and hardship. I would never seek help from police again.

aceofspades said :

Including the lazy old pen pushing station officers. What is the average age of general duties officers on the beat?

The figures quoted were from ACT Policing, that’s general duties. There are no “lazy old pen pushing station officers”. There’s an officer in command of the station, and almost every one else in the station is “on the beat”.

It sounds like you were involved in a family violence incident, for which the AFP is pro-arrest. It’s not uncommon for women, even with obvious injuries, to deny to police that anything has taken place. Most people would be surprised at how many family violence incidents police attend.

Handcuffing is never “forced” unless the person being handcuffed is resisting arrest or non-compliant. If the person is compliant it’s very easy and there is certainly no force required. I think you’re not telling the full story.

Family violence may include, but is not limited to, criminal behaviours such as:

•assault (for example slapping, punching, kicking, grabbing, pushing)
•threats to physically harm a person
•confining a person against their will, etc

http://www.police.act.gov.au/community-safety/abuse-and-family-violence.aspx

Henry82 said :

aceofspades said :

. In general police officers are lazy young kids that lack any form of life experience.

Average age is 36 so im not sure on your definition of “young kids”
http://www.afp.gov.au/media-centre/facts-stats/afp-staff-statistics/staff-in-act/staff-in-act-policing.aspx

Including the lazy old pen pushing station officers. What is the average age of general duties officers on the beat? I speak from experience, I have been unfairly treated myself in a domestic situation purely because I am a large man. No investigation was done, assumptions were made and even my partner the “forced victim in fear of her life” did not agree with their assumptions and refused to agree that their was any threat from me. My charge was assault police because an officer scratched his finger while trying to force handcuffs on me in front of my young children and neighbours. It taught me that police officers make up their own minds and will happily tell blatant lies to suit themselves. Before this incident I would have never believed it, I stupidly thought they would be my protectors.

aceofspades said :

I have personally watched supposedly upstanding protectors of society stand in court and outright lie and manufacture evidence in unison to cover their own actions. In general police officers are lazy young kids that lack any form of life experience. They are quick to jump to conclusions without proper investigation in order to find the easiest way out of doing any work. They learn very quickly that if they are irrational or irresponsible they can hide behind their uniforms and their partners in order to avoid any consequences for their actions. If police officers did their job appropriately then they probably would not be assaulted anywhere near as much as they are. I doubt that any information general public receive surrounding an assault police charge has any semblance to truth. Why should assaulting a police officer carry a higher penalty than assaulting any other ordinary citizen?

Now that’s an outstanding piece of reasoning. I particularly like the innovative thinking that leads you to conclude that drunken hoods who assault police officers are really not at fault. In fact, if I understand you correctly, you believe that the police themselves are actually to blame for most such assaults because they don’t do their jobs very well.

Can you elaborate on this at all. I’d really like to know what aspect of their jobs police officers could improve on that would reduce the number of assaults on them. Really. I would.

aceofspades said :

. In general police officers are lazy young kids that lack any form of life experience.

Average age is 36 so im not sure on your definition of “young kids”
http://www.afp.gov.au/media-centre/facts-stats/afp-staff-statistics/staff-in-act/staff-in-act-policing.aspx

I have personally watched supposedly upstanding protectors of society stand in court and outright lie and manufacture evidence in unison to cover their own actions. In general police officers are lazy young kids that lack any form of life experience. They are quick to jump to conclusions without proper investigation in order to find the easiest way out of doing any work. They learn very quickly that if they are irrational or irresponsible they can hide behind their uniforms and their partners in order to avoid any consequences for their actions. If police officers did their job appropriately then they probably would not be assaulted anywhere near as much as they are. I doubt that any information general public receive surrounding an assault police charge has any semblance to truth. Why should assaulting a police officer carry a higher penalty than assaulting any other ordinary citizen?

LSWCHP said :

Violet68 said :

I would be only to happy to see the police who assault those who are obviously intoxicated and unable to defend themselves removed from the streets for a long, long time but I don’t see how giving them extra powers and increasing sentencing options will be of any use, if they continue to be held unaccountable for their actions.

This is nonsense. And it’s not just harmless and mildly amusing nonsense like Violet usually produces. It’s wicked and perverse nonsense that is offered without any apparent thought or any evidence to back it up. If police officers really were wandering the streets at night flogging drunks in public view then there would be an almight outcry, lawsuits, newspaper headlines about police brutality, long raves by victims on RiotAct etc etc. Bogan thugs are never backwards in using the law and all other means to protect themselves, as we know from the case of CRK for example.

So Violet, what you are suggesting here simply isn’t true. It’s blindingly obvious that it isn’t true to even the most casual observer. And it’s not just bogus, it attacks and damages the police without evidence or reason. It’s simply bad. It is vitriol sprayed without thought, and it discredits you.

I agree completely.

Personally I’d prefer to see the Police beat the absolute living crap out of people who assaulted them. Bogans and morons who decide to assault police are only really 0.001% above chimpanzees, stupid hairless monkeys and the results of their actions need to be tangible to them immediately as it is the only response they truly understand. They seem to innately believe they are alpha monkeys when the rest of society decided some centuries ago (probably around the time of the crusades) that they aren’t. They should therefore be availed of these thoughts as swiftly and forcibly as possible.

Then once they’ve had a while laying in a hospital bed reflected on the fact that they are stupid hairless chimpanzees (which they won’t because they don’t have abstract thoughts) the courts can then apply the longer sentences so they can discover they really are bottoms and next time when they are 45 years+ they’ll have some respect.

It’s really the only solution.

Take a bex LSWCHP.

LSWCHP said :

Violet68 said :

I would be only to happy to see the police who assault those who are obviously intoxicated and unable to defend themselves removed from the streets for a long, long time but I don’t see how giving them extra powers and increasing sentencing options will be of any use, if they continue to be held unaccountable for their actions.

This is nonsense. And it’s not just harmless and mildly amusing nonsense like Violet usually produces. It’s wicked and perverse nonsense that is offered without any apparent thought or any evidence to back it up. If police officers really were wandering the streets at night flogging drunks in public view then there would be an almight outcry, lawsuits, newspaper headlines about police brutality, long raves by victims on RiotAct etc etc. Bogan thugs are never backwards in using the law and all other means to protect themselves, as we know from the case of CRK for example.

So Violet, what you are suggesting here simply isn’t true. It’s blindingly obvious that it isn’t true to even the most casual observer. And it’s not just bogus, it attacks and damages the police without evidence or reason. It’s simply bad. It is vitriol sprayed without thought, and it discredits you.

Violet68 said :

I would be only to happy to see the police who assault those who are obviously intoxicated and unable to defend themselves removed from the streets for a long, long time but I don’t see how giving them extra powers and increasing sentencing options will be of any use, if they continue to be held unaccountable for their actions.

This is nonsense. And it’s not just harmless and mildly amusing nonsense like Violet usually produces. It’s wicked and perverse nonsense that is offered without any apparent thought or any evidence to back it up. If police officers really were wandering the streets at night flogging drunks in public view then there would be an almight outcry, lawsuits, newspaper headlines about police brutality, long raves by victims on RiotAct etc etc. Bogan thugs are never backwards in using the law and all other means to protect themselves, as we know from the case of CRK for example.

So Violet, what you are suggesting here simply isn’t true. It’s blindingly obvious that it isn’t true to even the most casual observer. And it’s not just bogus, it attacks and damages the police without evidence or reason. It’s simply bad. It is vitriol sprayed without thought, and it discredits you.

I would be only to happy to see the police who assault those who are obviously intoxicated and unable to defend themselves removed from the streets for a long, long time but I don’t see how giving them extra powers and increasing sentencing options will be of any use, if they continue to be held unaccountable for their actions

Of course you have evidence of these brutal and heartless coppers wandering through civic late at night beating up any poor hapless drunks they happen across?

Somewhere a bridge is missing its troll.

“I would be only to happy to see the police who assault those who are obviously intoxicated and unable to defend themselves removed from the streets for a long, long time but I don’t see how giving them extra powers and increasing sentencing options will be of any use, if they continue to be held unaccountable for their actions.”

Let me guess. You went into Civic one night and made a drunken ass of yourself, the end result being you got locked up. You tried to punch on with the cops but were lawfully restrained and spent the night in the cells.

The next morning you woke up feeling sad and sorry for yourself and made a bullshit complaint, which was in turn investigated then reviewed by the Ombudsman and found to be complete bollocks.

How does that sound? Either that or your mother’s brother’s cousin told you about a mate who it happened to in 1994.

Violet68 said :

johnboy said :

Less value in deterrence as much as just removing from the community.

Do you really believe that removing them from the community is going to give them more respect for it? Pfffft!

Who cares? Are you unfamiliar with the concept of punishment?

Oops, mucked up my last post, I’ll try again.

what_the said :

How about the ACT Courts actually start applying heavier penalties. It’s not like they’re maxing out the existing penalties, so what’s raising the ceiling going to do?

Looks like being seen to be doing something because ‘something needs to be done!’

I totally agree. Increasing the duration of incarceration available is only worthwhile if it is used. The police have no control over that.

Maybe if the judiciary were to have given the likes of Mully heavy sentences in the first instance, then it may have sunk into the heads of some of the other thugs hereabouts that their behaviour may end up with them being banged up for a long time, a sure disincentive.

But with Canberra having a “soft on crime, soft on the causes of crime”, reputation, what disincentive is there?

And there’s also this sort of apologist idiocy to deal with;

Violet68 said :

I would be only to happy to see the police who assault those who are obviously intoxicated and unable to defend themselves removed from the streets for a long, long time but I don’t see how giving them extra powers and increasing sentencing options will be of any use, if they continue to be held unaccountable for their actions.

johnboy said :

Violet68 said :

johnboy said :

Less value in deterrence as much as just removing from the community.

Do you really believe that removing them from the community is going to give them more respect for it? Pfffft!

What they respect is a matter for their own conscience.

But no one in prison has ever started a fight on london circuit.

Exactly – this is about protecting Jenny and Joe Average from the violence of dickheads.