24 December 2010

Capsicum foam victims take their claims to court

| johnboy
Join the conversation
74

The Age is running hard with the case Ken Cush & Associates have brought in the Supreme Court seeking compensation for the criminal use of capsicum foam by ACT police in the city watch-house.

The lawyer leading the class action said some people who watched footage of the incidents dubbed the city watchhouse ”Canberra’s Abu Ghraib”, in reference to the Baghdad prison where US military personnel abused Iraqi prisoners.

”These eight cases are the tip of the iceberg, and given the findings of the 2007 joint review [of watchhouse operations] by the AFP and the Ombudsman, I expect there are [more] victims of the culture that was allowed to flourish … at the city watchhouse,” Mr Barrow said.

The Commonwealth’s defence at this stage appears to be that the offences took place outside the three year limit on personal injury claims, also they’re not taking responsibility for the AFP.

Join the conversation

74
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

Curiously ‘authorities’ on here have all the anecdotal evidence to waylay the Police in every sense imaginable, but no solutions. The reality of policing is light years from their rose coloured perception of it. Perhaps a few of the ‘powerful’ personalities should join and change this damaging culture from within.

Then again I’d expect most of these armchair experts wouldn’t have the stomach for it

The whole respect needs to be earned thing is right to a certain degree. Respect is also given because of the persons occupation. Police fit into this.

Respect to Police officer shows that you respect what that officer is upholding. The respect is showing that you respect the laws of Australia.

Shadow boxer “Respect needs to be earned, it can’t be demanded.”

Useless cliché in this case.

With the police there is only one way ….their way. You need to respect that. Its not demanded. Its “the way it is”. It is in your self interest to give respect and to maintain it. You can try tolerance as an alternative. Contempt …………….Psssssst

Well if they stop spraying handcuffed offenders in the face while others stand by and watch

Yeah that stopped about four years ago and Birch has since been convicted. Or are there more cases you need to tell us about?

stop asking for more non-lethal weapons when the guidelines for using the ones they have are totally inadequate

You know the guidelines do you? Do tell…

stop acting as a political arm of goverment and making secret payments to their victims I’m sure that respect can be slowly restored.

You’ll need to explain that one, unless you’re referring to Haneef, which has nothing to do with ACT policing.

Respect needs to be earned, it can’t be demanded.

Finally, something we can agree on 😉

“They do it before the police arrive and after the police leave. “

Bullshit, who do you think gets called 1st 9 times out of 10

shadow boxer said:

“Well if they stop spraying handcuffed offenders in the face while others stand by and watch ,stop asking for more non-lethal weapons when the guidelines for using the ones they have are totally inadequate and stop acting as a political arm of goverment and making secret payments to their victims I’m sure that respect can be slowly restored.

Respect needs to be earned, it can’t be demanded.”

Thats all well and good, but don’t tar all with a the same brush. It’s not fair and a simple minded view taken from the actions of a couple of members.

matt31221 ,Oh please “Police Bashing” I did a search and doughnuts haven’t been mentioned. Here on RA and “real world”, the police look after themselves pretty well.

“I’d like to see [the criticizers] deal with a delusional psychopath high on heroin and ICE. ”
Medical staff, family and friends, deal with this every day too. They do it without tasers or capsicum spray. They do it before the police arrive and after the police leave.

I prefer to stand up as a citizen and say that senseless violence has no place in Canberra. What I can’t do is beat/spray you till you comply. ……You get how that works.

I respect the police. I don’t lye to them. Its all I’ve got to offer.

shadow boxer4:52 am 30 Dec 10

Well if they stop spraying handcuffed offenders in the face while others stand by and watch ,stop asking for more non-lethal weapons when the guidelines for using the ones they have are totally inadequate and stop acting as a political arm of goverment and making secret payments to their victims I’m sure that respect can be slowly restored.

Respect needs to be earned, it can’t be demanded.

I grinded that chip off with my axe.

a pity you didnt grind everything else off your shoulders at the same time……….

“The same culture that says look the other way while the Sgt beats someone in cuffs.”

Its 2011, not 1962. All you experts would be pissed and amazed to spend a week working night shift in a busy part of Canberra and see what happens in reality. It wouldn’t help your ‘expert’ opinions though.

Having said that, give me a yell when your employ offers you the experiences of being vomited on, spat on, had urine and faeces thrown at you, kicked in the mouth so you now possess false teeth, had your house and vehicle targeted with notes telling you its because of what you do, spent more time awake than asleep at 0400 of a weekday morning, had guns and knives pointed at you……..need I go on.

The matters you bang on about were terrible but far from indicative of what goes on on a daily basis.

I grinded that chip off with my axe.

I like to include the police in my crimes. It wouldn’t be the same without them.

BTW, for all the conspiracy theorists, the number of substantiated complaints against police in Canberra for 09-10 is about double the target under the relevant KPI.

Tooks. Not just two cops. You know there is more.

You’re telling me what I know now, are you? It seems your rage is getting the better of you if you’re resorting to that kind of comment. Chill out a bit, it’s just a discussion, don’t take it personally.

Not just this incident. But your absolutely right, it would seem the front line police don’t have a problem with intimidation and bulling. Its just a public perception spread by dirty criminals to undermine trust in the police force.

I’m absolutely right about what? Are you putting words into my mouth? Did I say police don’t have a problem with intimidation and bulling (sic)? If so, quote when I said so.

How cool is that. Always being able to discredit the vast majority of complaints having come from dirty criminals or juveniles.

Obviously you have somewhat of a criminal past. That’s fine, plenty of decent people do. Unfortunately for you, it’s left you with a massive chip on your shoulder. If you have some experiences about ACT police bashing, bullying, intimidating you, then by all means, tell.

I actually thought police losing their temper and lashing out as being a bit juvenile/school yard. The bit that annoys me is that other police stand by and do nothing about it or deny its happening.

What exactly are you referring to? Just this case?

Tooks you are defending the reputation of your organisation and fellow officers. I am sure you would do this to the bitter end.

Actually farq, you don’t know what organisation I work for or even what career I’m currently in. I am supportive of police (although I’ve never supported Birch or people like him) obviously, however I am critical when it’s warranted.

The major issue with the Birch cases is the assaults happened over a pretty long period of time and not a single fellow officer attempted to stop him. They just stood around, watched and backed him up. It took months for one of Birch’s victims to be listened to by an officer. No one in that station put Birch up on charges.

Are you absolutely certain the bystanders who didn’t report Birch weren’t disciplined? I’m not sure about your other point that it took months for one of the victims to be listened to by an officer. Do you mean he came in to report it and the officer stuck his fingers in his ears and said ‘La la la la la. Can’t hear you.’ If you can find a source for that claim, I’ll happily concede defeat on that point.

The culture needs to change. This ‘us and them’ attitude cops tend to display (you can observe examples of the behavior on this site), is unacceptable, it’s just a bad attitude to have.

Ask victims of crime about this so called ‘us and them’ attitude. I think you probably think of it as ‘us (the community) vs them (the police), rather than the other way around.

The same culture that says look the other way while the Sgt beats someone in cuffs.

Obvious troll. You were going ok until then.

Tooks you are defending the reputation of your organisation and fellow officers. I am sure you would do this to the bitter end.

The major issue with the Birch cases is the assaults happened over a pretty long period of time and not a single fellow officer attempted to stop him. They just stood around, watched and backed him up. It took months for one of Birch’s victims to be listened to by an officer. No one in that station put Birch up on charges.

You guys stick together, it’s part of your culture. The same culture that says look the other way while the Sgt beats someone in cuffs.

The culture needs to change. This ‘us and them’ attitude cops tend to display (you can observe examples of the behavior on this site), is unacceptable, it’s just a bad attitude to have.

I expect the standard ‘you don’t have any experience in policing, so shut up replies’.

Tooks. Not just two cops. You know there is more. Not just this incident. But your absolutely right, it would seem the front line police don’t have a problem with intimidation and bulling. Its just a public perception spread by dirty criminals to undermine trust in the police force.

How cool is that. Always being able to discredit the vast majority of complaints having come from dirty criminals or juveniles.

I actually thought police losing their temper and lashing out as being a bit juvenile/school yard. The bit that annoys me is that other police stand by and do nothing about it or deny its happening.

Yay facet !!! Booooooo Tooks…

I suddenly feel like I’m in primary school.

Amongst my friends there is rule about never being alone with the police. Born from experience over many years.

You’ve had many dealings with police over many years? Hopefully you’ve cleaned up your act and grown up a bit.

Canberra police used to be far and away better behaved than NSW and VIC. Maybe we are just catching up.

And you base that on behaviour from two ACT cops four (nearly five) years ago? Okaaay…

“…and what would a thread like this be without police showing their contempt for members of our community.”

I think you’re confusing ‘contempt for the community’ with an inability to suffer fools.

Yay facet !!! Booooooo Tooks…..

…and what would a thread like this be without police showing their contempt for members of our community.

Really? Quote an example.

By the way, it’s interesting how you show contempt for a certain section of “our” community by exluding police from your definition of it. Are police officers not members of your community? Are they not victims of burglaries, assaults, thefts, property damage etc? Do they not pay taxes? Do their children not play alongside yours at school, weekend sports etc?

Your comment says more than I think you realise.

“What did they use for uncooperative people before this stuff was around. Oh, that’s right, batons, boots, torches, fists and the occasional “oops, we accidentally shoved your head into a wall”. Don’t think it matters what the police are issued with. There will always be a minority of police who think excessive force is justifiable.”before anything is said”

Thats the way I remember it. A punch to face before anything is said (NSW). Amongst my friends there is rule about never being alone with the police. Born from experience over many years. If there is an arrest/complaint, then its by two’s. It stops a lot of stupidity. Canberra police used to be far and away better behaved than NSW and VIC. Maybe we are just catching up.

Its good to see the police are protected against community violence. Now we just have to wait till the the rest of us can share in the same feeling. Or not………

Tooks said
“What would a thread like this be without at least one childish comment…”

…and what would a thread like this be without police showing their contempt for members of our community.

Lets hope that that any settlement of the Watch House case is conducted in a more transparent way than that of Dr Haneef.

While the amount given to Dr Haneef is kept secret, I think the Public have a right to know the details of the misconduct that gave rise to it.

During Dr Haneef’s detention, there was a veritable cornucopia of people on the public payroll giving chapter and verse to the media for public consumption on the alleged ‘facts’. Now it’s clear that Dr Haneef had committed no offence, and that those public servants didn’t quite cut the mustard, why shouln’t details of the stuff ups be made public? After all, the Public are paying.

@ Wilco: you lost me in the first two sentences. Wow, impressively LONG post…..

Calm down internet warriors, and get out and enjoy this beautiful weather.

Its good to see the police are protected against community violence. Now we just have to wait till the the rest of us can share in the same feeling. Or not………

What would a thread like this be without at least one childish comment…

In any legal proceedings, the Commonwealth and its agencies are obliged to conduct themselves as model litigants.

This obliges the Commonwealth and its agencies to uphold the highest possible standards of fairness, honesty and integrity – going beyond the required ethical or professional standards of lawyers appearing before a court or tribunal.

Specifically, the model litigant obligation requires that the Commonwealth and its agencies:

*act honestly and fairly;
*deal with claims promptly;
*pay legitimate claims without litigation;
*act consistently in the handling of claims and litigation; and
*consider alternative dispute resolution.

The obligation also requires generally keeping costs to a minimum and not taking advantage of claimants who lack resources to litigate a legitimate claim.

This however does not require the Commonwealth to take a soft approach to legal proceedings. The Commonwealth is able to act firmly and properly to protect its interests.

The obligation also doesn’t prevent the Commonwealth from legitimately seeking to recover its costs where appropriate.

Holding the Commonwealth and its agencies to a high standard is not a new concept. The obligation has been around since the 1912 High Court case of Melbourne Steamship Co Ltd v Moorehead (1912) 15 CLR 333. Unfortunately, there’s been the odd lapse, as any survivor from the 1964 Voyager/Melbourne accident will readily acknowledge.

The inescapable inference from the settling of the Haneef matter out of court is that the Commonwealth knew that it had little hope of successfully resisting Dr Haneef’s claims. The publically available Volume 1 of the Clarke Report speaks for itself. One wonders what the classified Vol 2 might say.

Returning to the ACT Watch House case, as has been pointed out by ‘John Boy’, the first two respondents have already been criminally convicted. Also, the AFP and Commonwealth Ombudsman were aware of problems in the watch house prior to the commissioning of a Joint AFP/Ombudsman Review in February 2007, which was triggered in part by concerns raised by complaints from persons who had been held in police custody in the Watchhouse.

Interestingly, some of the deficiencies identified by the 2007 Review included:

• Incomplete, inconsistent and out of date guidelines for management of persons in custody;
• Lack of formal training for staff appointed to the Watchhouse, either before deployment or in-service;
• Limited staff understanding of the duty of care owed to detainees who may be at risk or have special needs;
• Inadequate numbers of staff to meet the duty of care owed to all detainees during peak periods;
• Poor staff supervision and management, including evidence of poor staff morale and inconsistencies in practices between teams in the Watchhouse;
• Limited reporting or analysis of Watchhouse performance information that could assist in monitoring the effectiveness of Watchhouse operations;
• Inadequate advice to detainees about their rights and obligations when in custody in the Watchhouse, including the right to complain about their treatment; and
• Limited understanding of the value of complaints to the organisation or how
complaint data can be used to improve organisational outcomes.

For the Commonwealth to now rely on an ‘out of time’ defence and to deny its vicarious liabilitiy for the acts of its employees when it knew or ought to have knwn that there were serious problems in the ACT Watch House flies in the face of its model litigant responsibilities and seems totally at odds with the approach taken in the Dr Haneef case. Unless, of course, there’s one rule for senior officers and another for sergeants.

Its good to see the police are protected against community violence. Now we just have to wait till the the rest of us can share in the same feeling. Or not………..

.

Nothing about exceeding authority, as the legislation empowered them to do so….which is my point

@ shadow boxer

The amount paid as part of the settlement is usually agreed by the parties as not to be disclosed.

The most frequent reason for this is that the party making the payment don’t want to set a precedent amount for others with similar claims.

Often those receiving the payment also don’t want it generally known how much they were paid – they sometimes settle for much less than the press speculation would have us receive.

The quantum of the payment is only part of the consideration. In many cases the agreed text of an apology or a retraction can be more important than any actual direct payment ie restitution of reputation and other like valuable considerations.

shadow boxer, they do this with all compensation and ex gratia payments for stuff-ups. I agree that it is bad practice (unless the payee wants it kept confidential).

Their rationale is that these payments should not set precedents, ie each should be determined on the merits, and to discourage everyone with a grievance from joining the queue.

They are not handed out lightly. I conclude that they figured that a lawsuit would have cost them much, much more and been very embarrassing.

shadow boxer7:46 pm 26 Dec 10

The thing I dont get about the Haneef case is why the settlement was confidential. It’s taxpayers money being used to compensate someone who was wrongfully accused.

Why is it being kept secret and not being published in the Gazette ?

vg

With the greatest of respect, I suggest you re- read the Clarke Report.

May I especially take you to p. 97:

“Throughout the investigation Commander …… was intimately involved in
the details of the inquiries being conducted by investigators. To some extent, this
close involvement and supervision arose from the circumstances in which the
investigative team was required to come to grips with relatively untested
legislative provisions in a complex and fluid factual setting. It is possible,
however, that Commander ……’s familiarity with the minutiae of the investigation
hampered him in adopting a critical perspective of the case against Dr Haneef
and prevented him from making an objective assessment for the purpose of
making decisions in relation to the detention, charging and prosecution of
Dr Haneef.”

And at p. 279:

“I also wish to say something about the role of the senior investigating officer.
Commander …… said he performed this role in the following way: ‘I drill
down into the weeds, into a lot of detail, but that is typically not what an SIO
does. They are typically more high level, strategic, looking at the direction of the
investigation in that sense’.

By drilling ‘down into the weeds’, I believe Commander ……. became too
close to the Haneef case and lost both perspective and a degree of objectivity.
……. presented as a committed, professional and competent individual and
was held in high esteem by the officers he led, but his failure to maintain a more
‘high level and strategic’ perspective hampered his effectiveness. The words he
used to describe his role possibly explain why, in my opinion, this occurred.”

Also, Mr Clarke, in considering if pressure was applied by the AFP to the CDPP to give positive advice said (at p.153-4):

“In his statement to the Inquiry Mr …… said he felt an ‘unspoken but
considerable pressure to provide positive reassurance to police … it did not
however impair my judgement … [or] lead me to give the type of advice that I
would not ordinarily have given’. Mr ….. told the Inquiry he was not
suggesting he was being ‘driven into a corner’, but he did feel ‘there was pressure
to produce something, to produce it today’. Commander …… was very
‘upbeat’ and told him ‘the case can only get stronger’. He gained the impression
the police felt they had a ‘really good case’, and he was ‘loath to say no’.

Commander …… acknowledged that he had presented the case to Mr …. in a confident and positive way.

It is regrettable that Mr …. did not know of the views the police held. That
might have helped him gain a greater understanding of the case than could be
gleaned from the briefing paper and the other ad hoc material that was provided
to him. Mr …… told the Inquiry he was ‘absolutely astonished’ to learn that the
police did not think there was enough to charge. Had he been aware of this, he
‘would not have agreed that the evidence was sufficient to satisfy the arrest test
without a great deal more discussion and consultation with those who held a
contrary view.

Although Mr Porritt said the pressure to provide ‘positive reassurance’ did not
impair his judgment, I do not believe this to be the case”.

You can view the entire Report at http://www.haneefcaseinquiry.gov.au/www/inquiry/rwpattach.nsf/VAP/(3A6790B96C927794AF1031D9395C5C20)~Volume+1+FINAL.pdf/$file/Volume+1+FINAL.pdf

I respectfully suggest that the plain meaning of Mr Clarke’s words is that the AFP’s performance in this matter amounts to something considerably less than satisfactory. Others may say it was a total SNAFU!

Also, you might not have seen the statement, particularly the middle paragraph, put out by the Attorney-General’s Department on behalf of the Commonwealth on 22 December 2010 concerning the out of court settlement reached by the Commonwealth and Dr Haneef’s lawyers – see http://www.ag.gov.au/www/agd/agd.nsf/Page/AbouttheDepartment_News_StatementonbehalfoftheCommonwealth

“Following a mediation conducted before the Honourable Tony Fitzgerald on 20 – 21 December 2010, the Commonwealth of Australia agreed to make a substantial payment to Dr Mohamed Haneef to compensate him for the events that occurred in 2007 which saw him arrested, charged and detained for a period and his visa cancelled with serious consequences for him and his family.

The AFP acknowledges that it was mistaken and that Dr Haneef was innocent of the offence of which he was suspected.

The Commonwealth apologises and hopes that the compensation to be paid to Dr Haneef will mark the end of an unfortunate chapter and allow Dr Haneef to move forward with his life and career”.

Press reports suggest that Dr Haneef received around $1m in compensation. That’s $1m in taxpayers’ funds, paid for by ordinary working Australians because the AFP (and, to a lesser extent, the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions) didn’t do a proper job.

Next you’ll be telling me that, consistent with Parkinson’s 6th Law of rewarding the incompetent, those involved in this sorry saga have since been promoted.

I’ve been reading and hearing about these events in local media (including RiotACT and other local internet sites) since the allegations first surfaced some years ago.

I found the allegations disturbing then and still do now.

To suggest that this is the equivalent of ‘Abu Ghraib’ would be, I’d hope and expect, a gross overstatement (and not an uncommon tactic in litigation).

I know nothing about these events other than what I’ve read and seen in the media. The reports raise all sorts of unanswered questions.

The first series of three pictures on the front of the Canberra Times of 24/12/2010 taken, I understand, from CCTV recorded in the Watch-house seem to show a hand cuffed person being sprayed by a police officer while two others watch on. A fourth picture shows another police officer spraying a person in a similar manner.

The AFP themselves don’t appear to have been candid about these events and the actions taken in relation to them. I accept, of course, that privacy considerations limit the amount of detail they can prudently provide.

There seems to be nothing from the AFP to say these particular events were out of the ordinary (I’m quite open to being corrected on this!). That later it’s said the performance of CCTV in the Watch-house needs to be ‘reviewed’ and ‘with officers to be trained on hard drive video retrieval’ seems at the best to be facile and doesn’t engender confidence.

However, the general public would seem to deserve, and the AFP themselves would be well served, by providing some better information on the AFPs actions in response to the events.

A search, for example, of ‘watch house’ on the AFP website provides two relevant press releases – one of which says there’s to be a joint investigation by the AFP and the Ombudsman and the second announcing some time later the finalisation of the investigation and the AFPs formal response to the recommendations.

There are recommendations regarding better handling of detainees with special needs, handling of detainees property and that there needs to be a focus on treating detainees with dignity. These, along with ‘detainees will have access to a telephone pursuant to the Crimes Act’ either make this a ‘general motherhood’ review or raise even more questions.

The recommendations also include the formation of a ‘steering committee’ that is to ‘reconvene by December 2007’ and report on progress on the implementation of the recommendations. And after that – no more press releases on the matter that I can see so what actually was done is an ‘unknown’ .

There have been all sorts of reasons put up by individuals as to why possibly the four police officers may have done this. When I say four police officers I mean the two doing the spraying of capsicum foam and the two watching on. The two watching appear to be complicit in the first spraying event. That one officer was later convicted and required to do community service and another found guilty but not convicted just raises more questions.

Regardless of the reasons the particular officers had for their actions, the published pictures appear to show strong evidence of unlawful behaviour ie common assault and being complicit in common assault.

It’s an old adage but “justice not only needs to be done but need to be seen to be done”.

That others who believe they were assaulted in a similar way should ‘band together’ to seek some remedy against those they believe offended against them should not come as a surprise.

As per usual some intersting points and some gross speculation that’s obviously based on knowledge gained from fictional TV shows or perhaps a general dislike of Police.

Miz – it’s interesting the stories kids make up isn’t it? What parent wouldn’t want to believe their child?

I didn’t read the CT article that started this post, but as someone who has seen the FULL videos of two of these matters I can say Birch was totally unjustified in spraying the persons in the two instances that I have seen on tape.

As a former copper I am normally supportive of the police, and am well aware of the stress of policing and how it can effect people. I am not going to second guess the reasons that Birch did what he did, and what effect years of policing may have had on him. But I can say that in the two instances that I have seen the footage of, the two individuals did not deserve to be sprayed.

There was no threat to Birch or anyone else, they simply “back chatted” him, in a manner no worse than your kid might do if he doesn’t get his way.

Yes, policing is a stressful occupation, and sometimes idiots need to pulled into line, but that was not this case in the two matters that I have seen.

I would imagine that our ACT Supreme Court will grant an extension of time for these matters so that they can proceed [they almost always do in matters such as this]. If that happens, it is almost a certainty that the government will enter into settlement negotiations and make a payout, rather than cop more bad publicity.

georgesgenitals3:59 pm 26 Dec 10

Cops are like any other profession. There are some who do an amazing job under difficult circumstances, and others who shouldn’t be in the job at all.

If people were at least a bit more respectful (fearful?) of the cops to begin with, a lot of these problems would go away.

“the attitude in the AFP that was so starkly displayed by senior officers in the Haneef case of exceeding their authority and acting with excessive zeal.”

Do yourself a favour and read the Clarke report……and then apologise

Grumpy Old Fart2:24 pm 26 Dec 10

Wilco and Mystery2Me thankyou for backing up what I am saying in terms of getting out of the kitchen or burning out. The problem is that the AFP (who I do not work for) have apparently not got any mechanism for early retirement of those who burn out or who need to get out of the kitchen. Sometimes people do not recognise within themselves that they are jaded or burnt out and as Wilco stated maybe the responsibility lies to a degree with the Senior Management.

It is interesting that our politicians get golden handshakes for shorter terms of service but yet people in high stress industries don’t.

Wilco I think the Haneef case may have more to do with politics than evidence and exceeding authority but that is a whole different issue.

To Grumpy Old Fart: If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

Please disregard my previous post and replace with the following (has proper punctuation!)

Grumpy Old Fart

You (and others) start well but fade in the straight.

On any view, dealing with folk who are full of wind, booze and bad manners, and who go on to fail the attitude test in the City Watch House, requires a combination of resourcefulness, patience, tact and diplomacy.

Not all members of the Gendarmerie possess the temperament for such work.

It is the responsibility of senior AFP management to select suitable Watch House staff, to ensure those employed therein don’t burn out or otherwise exceed their authority, and to generally act according to law. Plainly this didn’t happen here.

Put another way, the real issue is ensuring that those charged with enforcing the law, do so in accordance with what the law actually says, and not what they think it says.

Allowing junior police to act as if the law doesn’t apply to them encourages the attitude in the AFP that was so starkly displayed by senior officers in the Haneef case of exceeding their authority and acting with excessive zeal.

Grumpy Old Fart

You (and others) start well but fade in the straight.

On any view, dealing with folk who are full of wind, booze and bad manners, and who go on to fail the attitude test in the City Watch House, requires a combination of resourcefulness patience, tact and diplomacy.

Not all members of the Gendarmerie possess the temperament for such work.

It is the responsibility of senior AFP management to both select suitable Watch House staff and ensure those employed therein don’t burn out or otherwise exceed their authority and act according to law. Plainly this didn’t happen here.

Put another way, the real issue is ensuring that those charged with enforcing the law, do so in accordance with what the law actually says, and not what they think it says. Allowing junior police to act as if the law doesn’t apply to them encourages the attitude in the AFP that was so starkly displayed by senior AFP officers in the Haneef case of exceeding their authority and acting with excessive zeal.

Grumpy Old Fart9:34 am 26 Dec 10

Perhaps instead of all this ill informed criticism from those who have never operated in a Policing environment one thing that is overlooked is the constant stress and strain of a job with a high potential to be injured or killed. Maybe Birch was simply burnt out and there were no checks and balances to ensure his mental health.

Think about spending everyday of your working life dealing with everyone else’s problems including violent offenders some on drugs some not. Some more desperate than others, some who want to kill or be killed and everytime you can be put in harms way.

I believe the armed services have a retirement pension after 20 years of service why not the same for Police Officers who have given 20 years of Civic duty in a very high stress environment? Just remember in most cases the Police are the first point of contact in repsonse to violent offenders while you are sitting on the sidelines being armchair critics

20 years of dealing with other peoples problems, arresting violent offenders who are then released back into the community by a weak kneed judiciary feed by lawyers who live on client excuses is enough to take a toll on anyone’s mental health.

“I dont think the problem is with the ‘grass-roots’ recruits, so much as it is with the fact that those in control of ACT policing dont actually live in the ACT.”

Bullshit. 100% of the Executive that controls ACT Policing live in the ACT.

You have absolutely no idea of what you speak

“Anyone under arrest is handcuffed for the safety of the officers”

Bullshit. There are procedural reasons for the use of handcuffs, and those reasons must exist before they are used. They aren’t used arbitrarily.

There’s nothing worsse than someone who thinks they know what they’re talking about

“As for spray not doing any harm, read up on some background on it then ,if you still have any doubts arrange to spray yourself”

Have you been sprayed?

Spidey has a good point, there are always two sides to every story. I’ve made the aquaintance of one of the so called victims and I have no doubt the bugger well and truly deserved it. Actually, I think they’d probably only benefit from frequent re-application of the same. I really hope this legal action doesn’t succeed, the last place taxpayers dollar should be going is the pockets of:
a) Ambulance chasing lawyers and,
b) Drunken idiots who got a faceful of capsicum spray after being dumb enough to mouth off at a cranky copper

As for the idea of slashing the budget for ACT Policing, are you people for real? From your perspective, they’re doing a crap job with the resources they’ve got, and you want to take more resources from them? Such a suggestion show’s a complete detachment from reality.

Dvaey said: “Dylan144 – He was handcuffed because he was obviously causing a problem

Anyone under arrest is handcuffed for the safety of the officers.”

dvaey, you have absolutely no idea on ACT Police procedure, so don’t post thinking that you do. That is US procedure, not AU.

I do love how people with no idea on police procedure get on here and spruk like they do or start telling police how they should do thier job when they have not walked a minute in the shoes of the “plod” Sure have an opinion but struth, some of what is said here is absolute rubbish or naiveness. From tarnishing all with the one brush, to blaming all of societies ill’s on Police and why Policing hasn’t solved it. It really is a thankless job. There is only sooooo much the Police can do, and I would contend that a great proportion of blame needs to squarley point at the people abusing the alcohol or committing the crimes.

Comment 16 from “miz” appreciate that you will believe your Son above all else being a parent and everything, but lets be honest, you have one version of events thats coming from your Son. Your Son would have a whole lot more reason to “embelish” the story. Not saying that your Son’s version is wrong or right, but were you there? Do you know for a fact that the version provided by your Son was 100% accurate?

If the ACT Police are so crap, I would dare some of you to compare their results to that of other jursidictions. I think you will find they are on par and/or even better in some instances.

It is funny that some people correlate that if Police try a new intiative, it means that they must have been lazy, useless bastards and have only now decided to do something about a particular issue …… how about this for a novel idea, maybe the police in partnership with other fields/areas have researched particular issues further to “enhance” the already used capabilities, to improve Policing in that field ???!!!! Isnt that good practice ????Policing to continually assess and reasses its appraoches and responses to improve how business is done.

Policing is not immune from “bad apples” or bad practices ….. anything with a human element will have flaws. If they do stuff legitimately bad, let them know and improvements can be made. If they do good, let em know too, that way they know what they are doing is hitting the spot.

Well Bd84, you better learn to read the story before posting…. Birch was the watch hose sergeant and was the one DOING the spraying… and he is the one with the mental problems – probably because his career is now nonexistent. As for spray not doing any harm, read up on some background on it then ,if you still have any doubts arrange to spray yourself. Even so called scumbags have rights. Innocent until proven guilty.

Tooks – Not going to happen. The Govt is happy with the AFP running ACT Policing, as they meet most KPIs. Where do you think the pool of recruits would come from anyway? Hint: the same place they come from now

I dont think the problem is with the ‘grass-roots’ recruits, so much as it is with the fact that those in control of ACT policing dont actually live in the ACT. Of the new AFP ACT policing officers, Id say over 90% live in the ACT. Of the AFP executive, I doubt 10% live in the ACT, hence the problem.

Dylan144 – He was handcuffed because he was obviously causing a problem

Anyone under arrest is handcuffed for the safety of the officers.

yeah right. do the crime, you deserve what the police feel is necessary to get you in line.

Fortunately, this isnt how things are supposed to work. Firstly, the punishment should fit the crime. Secondly, the police arent there to dish out penalties, thats what the courts and judges are for.

If you’re not complying with the lawful directions of the police and basically abusing the crap out of them, I do not see the problem with them using capsicum spray to subdue you. There is no reason not to comply with the direction, blaming the police when you are a scumbag just makes you even more of a scumbag.

This group of scumbags are clearly trying to earn some cheap money in their usual way possible, illegitimately. Capsicum spray/foam does not do any damage whatsoever, the metal problems would have clearly existed prior to the “incident”, otherwise they would not have ended up in the watchhouse. Throw the case out and make them pay the costs for wasting the precious time of our courts.

One of the absurd things about the police who did this was that none of the obliging observers were ever prosecuted as accomplices or for a conspiracy to pervert a crime. Total cowards in line with many of the comments above.

You sure none of the “obliging obversers” lost their jobs or were otherwise disciplined? What is “conspiracy to pervert a crime?”

A great place to start would be to cut the funding of the ACT police budget by say 50%. At worst that would get rid of half the wasters we have to pay to fail at their job and they could only be about half as bad.

That’s a brilliant idea and would do wonders for the crime rate in this city. Crime would be rampant if that was the case, and you’d be among the first to complain.

The latest offensive on alcohol fueled violence is more testimony on the ineffectiveness of the local police in allowing matters to get to an allegedly unacceptable level than it is to their ability to perform.

That paragraph makes no sense.

Two officers (who are no longer police) act illegally and now people are tarnishing the remainder with the same brush. Seems fair…

well despite everyone syaing they wouldn’t be a problem when they were first introduced and police would only use them within strict guidelines I think we have now had a Taser/Capsicum related death or a police officer convicted in every state in Australia

Actually, you’d be hard pressed to find one example of a OC spray related death in the whole country. If you can find a case in each state of a taser-related death, then it should be easy to find links to them.

Like it or not, OC spray is here to stay, and Tasers will eventually be made available to all front line police in the ACT.

Grumpy Old Fart6:42 pm 24 Dec 10

Maybe every Police Officer who has been spat on, punched, kicked, stabbed, shot and the families of officers killed in the Line of Duty should start a class action for the breach of their human rights.

Yes people should be accountable for their actions but the door swings both ways. Maybe it is the fault of society in general for disintergrating to such a point that only a small group of morally corageous people have the ability to stand up as best as they can for the rights of everyone. The rest just sit on the sidelines making snide comments and criticizing the ‘no’ stress environment in which the Police operate in.

No better still lets just have criminals do whatever they want to do so then all the anarchists, hooligans and troublemakers can run riot.

“A great place to start would be to cut the funding of the ACT police budget by say 50%. At worst that would get rid of half the wasters we have to pay to fail at their job and they could only be about half as bad.”

Good work, cause we don’t need Police on the road or anything. How about the public servant’s that sit around drinking coffee all day? Why don’t we cut all their funding to. How about we only pay the firies per fire they put out, or Ambo’s per trip to the Hospital. I know why don’t we pay teacher’s per kid that get’s an A grade. You’re on to a winner there sunshine.

“The latest offensive on alcohol fueled violence is more testimony on the ineffectiveness of the local police in allowing matters to get to an allegedly unacceptable level than it is to their ability to perform.”

I think you will find it is a problem Australia wide, but don’t let that fact get in the way of your story. But you know blaming the Police for the community’s disregard when it comes to drinking responsibly AND serving alcohol responsibly, yeah sure, we should blame the Police for poverty and all the pot holes around Canberra and the flood that happened a couple of week’s back, if the Police weren’t around that wouldn’t have happened.

shadow boxer4:15 pm 24 Dec 10

well despite everyone syaing they wouldn’t be a problem when they were first introduced and police would only use them within strict guidelines I think we have now had a Taser/Capsicum related death or a police officer convicted in every state in Australia.

Question marks also sem to hang over most of the deaths including the in QLD where someone with mental issues was tasered 18 times in two minutes and died while his wife begged the police to stop and a watch-house incident in WA that makes the ACT one look like childs play.

merlin bodega4:00 pm 24 Dec 10

One of the absurd things about the police who did this was that none of the obliging observers were ever prosecuted as accomplices or for a conspiracy to pervert a crime. Total cowards in line with many of the comments above.

A great place to start would be to cut the funding of the ACT police budget by say 50%. At worst that would get rid of half the wasters we have to pay to fail at their job and they could only be about half as bad.

The latest offensive on alcohol fueled violence is more testimony on the ineffectiveness of the local police in allowing matters to get to an allegedly unacceptable level than it is to their ability to perform.

I saw the front of the canberra times today. What a Joke! Some poor innocent good guy hardworking 27 year old public servant (who must be telling the truth) was brought to the watchhouse for drink driving 4 years ago. He was handcuffed because he was obviously causing a problem, and sprayed because he was continuing to cause a problem, and now that he has finished University and decided that he would like to get a good job and join the real world, he is kicking up a fuss about being ‘tortured’ in the watchhouse? He was drink driving. What if he had hit and killed someone? the same officers that caught him drink driving, would have had to instead scrape a dead body off the road, and inform the family of the victim that their son/daughter had been killed by a very innocent good guy public servant. yeah right. do the crime, you deserve what the police feel is necessary to get you in line. It is pathetic that someone who was caught drink driving, somehow thinks that he is the victim in this. What a World we live in!

What did they use for uncooperative people before this stuff was around. Oh, that’s right, batons, boots, torches, fists and the occasional “oops, we accidentally shoved your head into a wall”. Don’t think it matters what the police are issued with. There will always be a minority of police who think excessive force is justifiable.

I have a disturbing story to add. My son was sprayed with capsicum when he was a juvenile – he was 15 or 16 at the time. (He is 19 now).

He and some mates were having a barbie at the Point Hut Pond Adventure Playground in Gordon one summer evening, when a bunch of idiots turned up and started throwing things up at the light poles (to smash the bulbs). Local residents called the cops. Unfortunately, my son and his mates were wrongly targeted as the possible vandals.

My son, who is tall, was sprayed TWICE by a very short female officer. The first spray was supposedly because he was (truthfully but forcefully) refuting having any involvement in the light pole smashing. He was sprayed again a short time later, while he was lying on the ground, for ‘moving after being told to keep still’ by the same officer. He later told me that he was moving because he was having trouble breathing after the first spray.

My son and his friends were then taken to Tuggers cop shop. However, no charges were laid against any of them and their irate parents (including me) collected their sons.

Given the circs, I was very, very concerned after I found out capsicum had been used on my boy. Luckily, he has not had any post-spray health issues. However, he now has a serious trust issue with the police, thanks to their vigilante behaviour and false assumptions about young lads.

I certainly don’t think capsicum spray gets used appropriately by police if my son’s experience is anything to go by.

“It’s sad that it appears no police force in the country can be trusted with non-lethal weapons and fails to understand the distinction between enforcing compliance and protection from an imminent threat. As soon as they get them they misuse them.”

Define misuse, because what you are alluding to is systemic misuse. How many times was OC spray, as an example, deployed in Australia last year, and how many complaints or findings of misuse were there?

How many times, as another adjuct, was OC spray deployed in a place like the ACT Watch-House, before and after the incident everyone seems to know so much about, and how many complaints were there of its use?

“No wonder people are against giving them all Tasers”

In Qld they ‘all’ have Tasers, and I can tell you there’s no massive groundswell against their use there, unless you count Terry O’GORMAN as a groundswell

Shadow boxer +1

shadow boxer2:12 pm 24 Dec 10

It’s sad that it appears no police force in the country can be trusted with non-lethal weapons and fails to understand the distinction between enforcing compliance and protection from an imminent threat. As soon as they get them they misuse them.

No wonder people are against giving them all Tasers.

The ACT is the only state or territory in Australia without its own police force. It’s about time we had a police force that responded to local community priorities instead of overseas postings.

Not going to happen. The Govt is happy with the AFP running ACT Policing, as they meet most KPIs. Where do you think the pool of recruits would come from anyway? Hint: the same place they come from now.

“Canberra’s Abu Ghraib”. Really? They’re going to compare the two?

Thankfully the victims of Abu Ghraib are unlikely to ever read such an insensitive and pathetic comment (from the lawyer, not Chaz).

Abu Ghraib: Murder, rape, sodomy, putting naked prisoners on a leash, forcing prisoners to masturbate, making a pyramid of naked Iraqi prisoners…the list goes on.

To compare that with anything that happened in the watch house is disgraceful.

From the photos in CT today, one has to wonder if there is a serious case to answer – looking at the cop on the same side of the counter as the “perp” standing there with his arms crossed – didn’t exactly look like there was an imminent threat that required the use of a weapon to avert.

There was a case to answer. This has been before a criminal court already.

The ACT is the only state or territory in Australia without its own police force. It’s about time we had a police force that responded to local community priorities instead of overseas postings.

Because letting the local council ACT Government be in charge of the local police (and fund it) will surely improve things.

Abu Ghraib?

Give me f*cking strength.

Oh, they’re ‘class action lawyers’. That explains it. The litigious version of ambulance chasers.

I concur cranky !!!

The ACT is the only state or territory in Australia without its own police force. It’s about time we had a police force that responded to local community priorities instead of overseas postings.

“Canberra’s Abu Ghraib”. Really? They’re going to compare the two?

Gungahlin Al10:47 am 24 Dec 10

From the photos in CT today, one has to wonder if there is a serious case to answer – looking at the cop on the same side of the counter as the “perp” standing there with his arms crossed – didn’t exactly look like there was an imminent threat that required the use of a weapon to avert.

A Noisy Noise Annoys An Oyster10:37 am 24 Dec 10

The cops in the ACT seemed to run wild in the early to mid 2000s and nobody was in charge pulling them into line. If I remember correctly, a female was Chief Police Officer during this period. A gay friend told me how he was regularly roughed up by cops when frequenting gay beats and on one occasion was even threatened with being taken to the watchhouse. When he told them that nobody was being harmed by what he was doing, and then asked why they were threatening and harassing him all the time he was told “because we can”.

From today’s CT.

“Birch told the CT”

“A cloud of doom has hung over my head all these years and it’s done nothing for my mental health”

It will probably drive me into the ground and it will probably bury me by the time it is finished”

My heart bleeds, you bullying wretch.

Well there’s already been two criminal convictions. how much more proof do you want?

“With great power goes great responsibility.”

If this is proven, heads should roll up to the highest level.

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.