Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Skilled legal advice with
accessible & personal attention

Clea Rose – Things not done by the book after all

By johnboy - 10 May 2007 61

Despite howls from our policing friends that only bad people ask questions about policing, and other howls from delusional members of the community who wouldn’t be able to get to sleep at night if their glossy brochure image of policing were to be ruptured, something new and interesting has come out of the Clea Rose inquest.

The Canberra Times has the fascinating report.

“The third day of the inquest heard Sergeant Bob Sobey was ACT Policing communications team leader on the night July 29, 2005, and the early morning of the following day, a role which included pursuit controller.

Sergeant Sobey told the ACT Coroner’s Court yesterday that as pursuit controller, it was his role to take charge of any police pursuit as soon as it was called in to him. However, he had not been notified of the pursuit that lead to Ms Rose’s death until after she had been struck by the stolen car being tailed by police.

Sergeant Sobey said if he had been dictating the pursuit over the radio to Constables Graeme Cooper and Constantinos Bobolas, he would have ordered they terminate it immediately after the suspect turned into the bus interchange”

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
61 Responses to
Clea Rose – Things not done by the book after all
seepi 7:42 pm 10 May 07

ON radio they said he was attending to a 000 call.

They also reported that police records showed the ooo call coming in 36 seconds after the Clea Rose accident (I think).

Conspiracy theories or not, the police are not doing themselves any favours by being secretive and obstructive. It makes them look as if they ahe something to hide, even if they don’t.

Pandy 4:52 pm 10 May 07

Move along Johnboy. Nothing to see here.

Special G 4:40 pm 10 May 07

Sgt Sobey may have been getting a coffee or taking a piss. Either of those things would put him away from his desk for long enough to miss this entire incident. A lot of things can happen in a 10 second period.

andy 4:24 pm 10 May 07

yea, JTK, but what happens then ? the driver loses control of the car anyway…

James-T-Kirk 3:43 pm 10 May 07

Yep… A tragedy indeed, caused because the cops simply didn’t put a round into the back window of the stolen car.

You are in a stolen car – speeding away from police – expect something bad to happen.

That’s the way Victorian cops work…

Boom —- Stop, or I’ll shoot.

seepi 1:40 pm 10 May 07

At the very least this proves (yet again) that Canberra police are understaffed.

In this instance ‘prioritising’ between a 000 call that the comms controller was dealing with, and this fatal car chase.

KandyA 1:27 pm 10 May 07

what IS a suspicious car?

johnboy 1:01 pm 10 May 07

From further down in the article:

He also said he would have expected the officers to inform him earlier when they had decided to follow the car to order it to pull over

Now MRB, if YOU want to give your version of events at the inquest we would love to run it.

Personally I’m happy to rely on the CT, ABC, and WIN. And that’s all that matters to me.

MRB 12:55 pm 10 May 07

Did you go to the inquest jb? No? So again you get your information from the CT. If you had gone to the inquest, you’d know that the whole incident lasted a matter of seconds, with the police spotting a suspicious car coming out of the LA carpark in the opposite direction. By the time the police had turned around, the car was already entering East Row, leaving East Row as the police car entered – hence the 5 seconds between the car and the police car passing on the CCTV. (Damn, the police are thinking, I wish we were more secretive and got rid of that CCTV footage).
Do you think it was possible to check if the car was stolen prior to Ms Rose being hit? Do you think they should’ve called police comms because they were doing a u-turn to follow a suspicious vehicle?
Also, why don’t you use your investigative skills, and try and find the real situation with the CCTV cameras at the time, not the one you’ve conjured up through media reports, and love to regurgitate. I’d love to tell you, but I’m sure you’d twist it around to suit your own purposes, which, I must say, you’re quite adapt at.
Maybe even ask your mate nik_the_pig. He is strangely silent on this matter – I wonder why that is?

Caz 12:21 pm 10 May 07

If a Coronial Inquest doesn’t increase the sentence where it matters, on the kid in jail who actually deserves to burn for this, then it is a giant waste of time

Are you for real? Isn’t the point of a coronial inquest to determine what happened exactly and if it was a preventable accident, to make recommendations to procedure that should be implemented and adhered to in future so this sort of thing can theoretically can’t happen again?

andy 12:08 pm 10 May 07

and by that i mean, i’m sure he would have done it appropriately.. not passed the buck down the line or whatever.

andy 12:07 pm 10 May 07

Bob’s a good guy. I have no doubt he would have played it down the line.
Much respect for him.

johnboy 11:55 am 10 May 07

Ahh, the tinkerbell philosophy, only able to think of one thing at a time.

The toe-rags have been convicted and sentenced.

The question now is why our secrecy obsessed police force when the light is shone under their rock, turn out to be understaffed, breaking procedures, and with a broken CCTV network (which they had no plan in place to fix).

Leaving aside the Clea Rose fatality those things seem like a major problem worthy of addressing and intelligent human beings should be able to think of both things at the same time.

hk0reduck 11:44 am 10 May 07

^^This guy tells it like it is^^

If a Coronial Inquest doesn’t increase the sentence where it matters, on the kid in jail who actually deserves to burn for this, then it is a giant waste of time.

JD114 11:29 am 10 May 07

Para 3 doesn’t change a thing. If the pursuit had been called off as the little toerag turned into the bus interchange it wouldn’t have changed a thing. The little toerag would still have been speeding through there, and it wouldn’t have been until the little toerag looked into his rearview mirror (assuming he was tall or smart enough to use the device) further down the road, that he might have been tempted to ease off.

If the pursuit had been called off a minute before the toerag was anywhere near the interchange, then it might have made a difference. And the difference might have been that the toerag considered he had carte blanche to steal a car and by dint of driving it anywhere in the city he would simply be able to get away.

Let’s get real here, bleaters and misguided ‘caring’ types, the fact is the little toerag stole property and the police have an obligation to weigh up the risks of letting toerags go, or trying to catch them to prevent further crimes. I think most sensible balanced people understand that there is a small element of risk in pursuing toerags in stolen cars but simply letting them go is only an invite to compound the problem.

1 2 3 5

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site