Controlled operations to go

johnboy 8 August 2008 71

One of the livelier debates on this site was sparked by the Crimes (Controlled Operations) Bill 2008.

Minister for Police and Emergency Services, Simon Corbell, has now announced that it’s passed into law.

Deb Foskey was up in arms about this on Tuesday saying:

    “Unlike other jurisdictions which are able to exercise close oversight and control of their police forces, the ACT has no such power. ACT policing only has to submit a limited report once a year to the Attorney General” Dr Foskey said today.

    “NSW has the Independent Commission against Corruption. Other jurisdictions have similar bodies. We rely strongly on the AFP to oversight ACT Policing. I agree with the AFP Association that the Haneef case has undermined the public’s faith in the independence of the AFP. The ACT needs its own anti-corruption body.”

Simon says don’t you worry about that:

    Dr Foskey also alleged that ACT Policing lacks independent oversight, which is another complete furphy. I would point Dr Foskey to:

    — The Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity (ACLEI) – the Commonwealth body empowered to prevent, detect and investigate corruption in the Australian Federal Police, including ACT Policing, and the Australian Crime Commission; and,

    — The Commonwealth Ombudsman and Commonwealth Privacy Commissioner

I’d ask Simon when was the last time any of those bodies held public hearings, conducted wiretaps, or compelled witnesses in relation to ACT policing matters?

ACT Policing

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

What's Your Opinion?

Please login to post your comments, or connect with
71 Responses to Controlled operations to go
teepee teepee 9:59 pm 10 Aug 08

In my view Saunders makes young Tess look ethical, honourable and hard working.

ant ant 9:52 pm 10 Aug 08

I wonder if Ms Saunders feels as angry about you, Headbonious, as you evidently feel about her? She should do, if you’ve “beaten” her in all those cases. She must lie awake at night, plotting your downfall.

Headbonius Headbonius 1:15 pm 10 Aug 08

Ant, JFTR, me (I’ve lost count) Ms Saunders 0. if you would like to hear it again…..0. Makes me happy every time I think about it.Actually I’ll say it again 0 :):):):) She is an irrelevance. I am not suggesting for an instant that many of the points Ms Saunders raises are not correct. Police Services require proper oversight and suitable sanctions to rightly protect civil liberties however Ms Saunders’ vocal criticims of Police Services around the country would carry more weight if the legal fraternity platform that she shouts from was itself squeaky clean and subject to the same scrutiny as police. It would appear the President of the ACT Law Society is a decent person who having considered the legislation can see that it has the appropriate checks and balances. It has been operating for years on a State and Federal level in Australia with notable successes in bringing down the Mr Bigs of the Drug Trade and other serious crimes such as murder and rape.

A ususal you display your traditional shallow insight into these matters. We appreciate your contribution.

ant ant 12:02 pm 10 Aug 08

Looks to me like Ms Saunders has won quite a few of these encounters!

Headbonius Headbonius 11:52 am 10 Aug 08

Cranky wrote “Some playing of the (wo)man and not the ball here.” Damn straight cranky. This individual sets herself up to be some shining beacon of righteousness, standing before the weak, opressed and downtrodden to protect them from the Jack-Booted Police.

IMHO she is an absolute disgrace in the same ilk as Chief Justice Higgins, that is, using other people’s misery to hone her own social agenda. She (and yes, she is the cat’s mother)refuses to acknowledge that Police are not the only ones immune from corruption. Where was her letter to the editor about Justice Einfeld’s corrupt behaviour in relation to his parking fines demanding a Royal Commission into corruption in the judiciary? Where is her outrage about the hundreds of solicitors and lawyers who have committed serious criminal offences? The asnwer? There isn’t any becuase it doesn’t suit her purpose.

So yes Cranky, I am cranky too now, I am playing the (wo)man because she sets herself up to be played that way.

Bleat on Jennifer, no one takes you seriously. The Controlled Operations legislation is going to absolutely cruel your criminal clients and I look forward to facing your inane and stupid questions and mudslinging tactics in the witness box. You can be assured that your client is going to jail whilst I go home (integrity intact, having told the truth) while you skulk off having madeup some fairy tale in a futile attempt to have your client exonerated.

cranky cranky 9:55 am 10 Aug 08

Some playing of the (wo)man and not the ball here.

The Police on this site and in the job generally demonstrate a high degree of team discipline, and obvious concern for the force.

It is unfortunate when this ethos stops uninvolved officers from blowing the whistle on unacceptable (watch house thuggery) and criminal behaviour by their collegues.

Without a blame/consequence free method of the force being made aware of these ‘indiscretions’, the public will forever be wondering what has not been revealed.

bigred bigred 9:41 am 10 Aug 08

proper scrutiny of the police does not include public confidence from what I read here.

Headbonius Headbonius 9:11 am 10 Aug 08

BTW, I believe in proper scrutiny for Police. They are subject to it on many levels including personal ones like mandatory urine testing for drugs. This is proper, they have enormous responsibilities to undertake. So do lawyers, enormous. How about mandatory drug and alcohol testing for lawyers and for that matter the judiciary? The decisions they make are too important to have them being made by people affected by drugs or alcohol. Wouldn’t you agree Jennifer or would that be an infrigement of your civil liberties? FFS. GFMD.

Headbonius Headbonius 7:38 am 10 Aug 08

If any further proof were needed of the multitude of flawed and often corrupt reasons why some people are so vehemently opposed to this legislation one need look no further than Sunday CT, Pg 14, letters to the editor. The first letter titled “Law Change a Folly” is penned by that bastion of civil rights, protecting the guilty and queen of whinging – Jennifer Saunders. She wheels out all the right emotive words and phrases with “The legal profession is supposed to be a bulwark against the worst excesses of the state” being one of the tastiest. Brilliant Jennifer, simply brilliant.

No one is claiming that corruption does not exist in all facets of society. Amongst lawyers too! Shock! Horror! Yes Jennifer some of your legal brothers and sisters are at the top of the corrupt list. Zarah Garde-Wilson anyone, God, the list could go on and on. So don’t set yourself and your profession up on a pedestal – you will topple off.

If you as the gun lawyer you obviously are detect corruption with that corruption detecting nose of yours, please inform us all of the obviously numerous times in your extensive years of ACT legal advocacy that your have uncovered police corruption defending the down trodden and oppressed. I am sure we will all be underwhelmed.

No Jen, the only realson you are against this legislation is because it is going to make your job as a highly paid story teller to the court so much more difficult to come up with a happy, fiarytale ending for your “downtroddne and oppressed clients” whose civil liberties have been so viciously savaged by the State. Bad luck.

bigfeet bigfeet 11:45 pm 09 Aug 08

Special G said :

4.5 tonnes of ecstacy seized in the worlds largest drug haul would suggest the AFP is staffed by people who are doing the job correctly. Controlled ops legislation would allow this sort of operation to run in the ACT.

I was wondering if someone would bring this up. This is a classic example of a controlled operation.

If these drugs had of come into the ACT (OK…unlikely with this quantity, because we are not a port or international airport…but it is still relevant) the police would have been able to seize the drugs…and do nothing else.

The controlled operations legislation in Victoria and NSW has enabled the AFP to follow this import to its recipient, and many others.

Drugs come into the ACT every day. This legislation simply gives the local plods the opportunity to follow any intercepted drugs to their recipient.

And as for oversight, there are a multitude of bodies in the ACT who review any complaint made against an ACT copper.

Headbonius Headbonius 11:07 pm 09 Aug 08

“The guys who conduct the multi million dollar investigations are unlikely to lurk here.”


Contrast Contrast 10:52 pm 09 Aug 08

bigred said :

Contrast you are a great big idiot. You should NOT do what you did with regards to identiying your father etc in a forum such as this. If you are truly who you say you are I can only guess at what your father will say when I next see him that you have identified him in a forum such as this. Swift kick in nether regions is required. Goose!!!!!

I did not in fact identify anyone. Merely their position.
Call me names if it helps you in some way, but I would have thought you would make some form of contribution to the subject in question? You would do well to stop thinking about my “nether regions” and to address the matter at hand, which is not in fact to do with me or my family.

bigred bigred 9:38 pm 09 Aug 08

Methinks these blokes suffer from Napoleon syndrome. Now little boys, get off the station computer and drive out to Charnwood or someplace similar and have a visible presence. The guys who conduct the multi million dollar investigations are unlikely to lurk here.

Headbonius Headbonius 8:15 pm 09 Aug 08

Careful JB, you are starting to sound like TheTruthWillBeTold, that’s not abuse, just an observation.

Special G Special G 7:50 pm 09 Aug 08

Me thinks we are getting a bit off topic here eh what.

The legislation is good, it will help catch bad guys who deal drugs to kids.

4.5 tonnes of ecstacy seized in the worlds largest drug haul would suggest the AFP is staffed by people who are doing the job correctly. Controlled ops legislation would allow this sort of operation to run in the ACT.

thecman thecman 7:49 pm 09 Aug 08

Come on JB – you can’t hide behind that smoke and mirrors – it only goes to prove the point that you have nothing but innuendo and supposition to justify the claim that an additional layer of oversight is required. Oldest trick in the book – ignore the legitimate questions by claiming you have answered them before. All anyone asks is that you provide some facts, some hard evidence, to back up what you and others on this thread are alleging. I actually don’t think that is unreasonable given that is the currency Police have to work with.

vg vg 7:20 pm 09 Aug 08

Either that or they/we are right……because you’ve never done the same St. John

johnboy johnboy 5:51 pm 09 Aug 08

The funny thing is you blokes scream at people and call them names and then think that, because they stop talking to you, that somehow you’ve actually won something or convinced someone…

vg vg 5:30 pm 09 Aug 08

johnboy said :

Sorry cman, outside of a court or parliamentary privilege I’d get in a world of pain for repeating the details of that sorry saga.

The rest is arguments I’ve had before, I’ll leave it to others to make the running.

Because it is BS

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Region Group Pty Ltd

Search across the site