Police Wrap - 23 August 2010

bigred said :

Tooks, you really have no idea of how this town operates. Are you a sworn member, or merely the janitor at the Winchester centre?

If anything would be a recruit at the college

Bigred,

I would suggest that a little bit of knowledge in this case does not make you informed. If I were to speculate on your empolyment or education – chances are I would be far off the mark.

Anybody can look at the AFP web site, legislation web sites, case law web sites… etc. But until you go out and actually KNOW the ins and outs you’re probably guessing a whole lot about how to enforce the law. There are many reasons charges don’t proceed – you seem intent on always speculating towards the negative.

Do you have a valid point in there somewhere? Probably, but your attitude is letting your argument down. The anger isn’t helping either!

dvaey said :

buzz819 said :

Here’s something for you dvaey, the courts have said they will not rely solely on CCTV footage as evidence to establish the identity of someone committing a crime.

On a slightly off-topic note, I find it interesting that the same court that will accept a single snapshot of a vehicle speeding, and can hold a vehicle owner responsible with no proof other than a digital photo, yet youre saying they wont accept a CCTV video, showing the actual crime taking place over several minutes.

buzz819 said :

So you have this “guy” whose gotten flogged in the street, he doesn’t want to make a statement, so you’ve got no evidence there, he attends court because he is subpoenaed, does not provide the court with any details, as a result the court finds the “offender” not guilty through lack of evidence. That process takes 6 – 18 months.

Just a thought, but why isnt the police officer who was injured, interested in making a statement? There was a similar story recently when two police officers were assaulted out the front of moosies, and no charges were laid. If even police assault cant/wont be prosecuted in the ACT, its no wonder the thuggies are running rampant.

I agree that assaults on police (and anyone else) should be prosecuted, provided there’s enough evidence of course.

bigred said :

So Tooks sent out for reinforcements. Have they installed free wifi down at the donut shop?

Haha, you have absolutely nothing, do you? I knew you would ignore my last post and come out with some childish sledging, because you have absolutely no ammunition to back up your claims. Reinforcements? Against you? Laughable.

Fact: You don’t know what I do for a living. You can assume all you like, but your basing your assumptions on the fact I am interested in the justice system and law enforcement and like posting on those topics. Regardless, I don’t post on work computers. Never have, never will.

The fact you like sledging people from behind your monitor without ever posting anything intelligent or constructive, makes you the epitome of internet tough guy/e-thug/troll etc. The fact you are middle-aged makes your comments even more sad and it screams major insecurity and/or self-esteem issues on your part.

buzz819 said :

Here’s something for you dvaey, the courts have said they will not rely solely on CCTV footage as evidence to establish the identity of someone committing a crime.

On a slightly off-topic note, I find it interesting that the same court that will accept a single snapshot of a vehicle speeding, and can hold a vehicle owner responsible with no proof other than a digital photo, yet youre saying they wont accept a CCTV video, showing the actual crime taking place over several minutes.

buzz819 said :

So you have this “guy” whose gotten flogged in the street, he doesn’t want to make a statement, so you’ve got no evidence there, he attends court because he is subpoenaed, does not provide the court with any details, as a result the court finds the “offender” not guilty through lack of evidence. That process takes 6 – 18 months.

Just a thought, but why isnt the police officer who was injured, interested in making a statement? There was a similar story recently when two police officers were assaulted out the front of moosies, and no charges were laid. If even police assault cant/wont be prosecuted in the ACT, its no wonder the thuggies are running rampant.

So Tooks sent out for reinforcements. Have they installed free wifi down at the donut shop?

bigred said :

SO my observation that the Auditor General might come up with some negative responses if she focussed on the AFP operations has lead the person who posts under the pseudonym of Tooks to assume I am angry. Sorry to quell the imagination – I am just informed. Face facts here, the AFP is engaged to do a job. They don’t do it to the agreed specification.

Well because you can’t tell us what job the AFP aren’t doing, then I’m going to think that you are un-informed.

They meet all the KPI’s set by the ACT Government, they do as much as the court’s will allow them to do.

Is this still about your toy bunny? That bunny’s goooonne!!

Now be good boys there, get off the station computer and maybe do what you are paid for fellas rather than lurking here waiting to fire your defensive and non constructive comments at any challenges to your usual slothful responses.

bigred said :

Sorry to quell the imagination – I am just informed.

Bah hahahahahahaha

bigred said :

SO my observation that the Auditor General might come up with some negative responses if she focussed on the AFP operations has lead the person who posts under the pseudonym of Tooks to assume I am angry. Sorry to quell the imagination – I am just informed. Face facts here, the AFP is engaged to do a job. They don’t do it to the agreed specification.

If it’s any consolation, I’m really sorry about what happened to your bunny.

bigred said :

SO my observation that the Auditor General might come up with some negative responses if she focussed on the AFP operations has lead the person who posts under the pseudonym of Tooks to assume I am angry. Sorry to quell the imagination – I am just informed. Face facts here, the AFP is engaged to do a job. They don’t do it to the agreed specification.

You seem very angry in general was my point.

According to you, the police aren’t doing their job – although the ACT Govt seem to disagree – to the agreed specification (whatever that means – post a link of the agreed specs): Why not start your own story about that, instead of constantly sniping about them on every other thread? It sounds like you have plenty of material for it?

And maybe take DJ’s advice (post 34), as you clearly have little understanding of how the criminal legal system works. You come across as quite naive and uninformed.

bigred said :

SO my observation that the Auditor General might come up with some negative responses if she focussed on the AFP operations has lead the person who posts under the pseudonym of Tooks to assume I am angry. Sorry to quell the imagination – I am just informed. Face facts here, the AFP is engaged to do a job. They don’t do it to the agreed specification.

Any police officer will take your specific complaint or call professional standards or the Commonwealth Ombudsman or the Auditor General.

Once your complaint has been investigated come back and let us know the outcome. Then you might like to add to the discussion and become a valued member of the Riot community instead of coming across as an angry troll.

SO my observation that the Auditor General might come up with some negative responses if she focussed on the AFP operations has lead the person who posts under the pseudonym of Tooks to assume I am angry. Sorry to quell the imagination – I am just informed. Face facts here, the AFP is engaged to do a job. They don’t do it to the agreed specification.

Tooks said :

huuuuge said :

well all i can say about our crap legal system is i got stabbed at jb about 9 months or so ago required stitches blah blah blah caught on camera with a ton of witnesses AND he was caught with a battleaxe and airgun as well, cops said it was pretty serious charges funny how hes out and about now with a slap on the wrist. DONT DO IT AGAIN i say take the law into our own hands for these punks.

Maybe you should start a new post about that one. Obviously he’s out on bail, but has he been sentenced yet? If so, what was the sentence?

There is already a post about only brief tho, they were keeping me updated regularly but when the judge kept postponing it over and over again i havent heard anything since which i might give that detective a call should be interesting to see if he actually got anything doubt it tho.

It’s probably time for some of the less knowledgeable trolls go to Court and actually see how things work. Their own experiences with Police are somewhat tainted since they have collectively never been wrong in their enitre lives.

Court, as a member of the public watching the process, should give them perspective and while they are unlikely to moderate their views the ignorant comments might slow down or be better aimed?

If you think you can do it better than it’s being done now – join and prove it. Otherwise educate youself a little so you don’t come off as being angry, clueless objectors while standing on the sideline.

buzz819 said :

Here’s something for you dvaey, the courts have said they will not rely solely on CCTV footage as evidence to establish the identity of someone committing a crime. So you have this “guy” whose gotten flogged in the street, he doesn’t want to make a statement, so you’ve got no evidence there, he attends court because he is subpoenaed, does not provide the court with any details, as a result the court finds the “offender” not guilty through lack of evidence. That process takes 6 – 18 months.

Theeeeen, the Police get criticised for putting the matter before the court …….

Damned if they do, damned if they don’t.

huuuuge said :

well all i can say about our crap legal system is i got stabbed at jb about 9 months or so ago required stitches blah blah blah caught on camera with a ton of witnesses AND he was caught with a battleaxe and airgun as well, cops said it was pretty serious charges funny how hes out and about now with a slap on the wrist. DONT DO IT AGAIN i say take the law into our own hands for these punks.

Maybe you should start a new post about that one. Obviously he’s out on bail, but has he been sentenced yet? If so, what was the sentence?

well all i can say about our crap legal system is i got stabbed at jb about 9 months or so ago required stitches blah blah blah caught on camera with a ton of witnesses AND he was caught with a battleaxe and airgun as well, cops said it was pretty serious charges funny how hes out and about now with a slap on the wrist. DONT DO IT AGAIN i say take the law into our own hands for these punks.

Tooks said :

Farq, you’ve admitted on this site a long time ago that you’re just a troll. Since that time, it’s difficult to take any of your comments seriously. Yes, it’s fun to try to get a rise out of people sometimes, but when it’s all the time, it loses its effectiveness, especially when the material is old.

dvaey, seriously, if you want to know how the system works, you need to do your own research, as you clearly have no idea how the legal system works (maybe start by looking up the definition of assault, proofs of the offence, defences etc). Stop asking me to spell out the basics for you. If I thought anything was getting through to you, I’d probably pick apart your last post as well, but I’m not going to waste my time, to be honest.

bigred: you seem like a very angry man. Why, I’m not sure. You obviously have some strange, rabid hatred of the police (even talking about them when it’s off-topic, like in the ACTION thread; sitting outside the Weston complex watching employees leave etc). Whatever the reason, if you want your posts taken seriously, maybe just dial back the rage a little bit.

I think bigred is all angry because the AFP failed to find his little lost toy bunny when he lost it. Now he’s all Emo. He can’t live without his bunny, his bunny is his world. Oh and he doesn’t have a life. Oh and he doesn’t know how the “real world” operates, because I believe bigred is a dismal failure wrapped up in a loser public servants body willing to take out his anger on authority. Big claps for bigred. The world needs more people like you, it makes the people who are better, I will call them “winners” feel even better about themselves, so yes you are important, you’re a morale booster, good work, keep it up.

Here’s something for you dvaey, the courts have said they will not rely solely on CCTV footage as evidence to establish the identity of someone committing a crime. So you have this “guy” whose gotten flogged in the street, he doesn’t want to make a statement, so you’ve got no evidence there, he attends court because he is subpoenaed, does not provide the court with any details, as a result the court finds the “offender” not guilty through lack of evidence. That process takes 6 – 18 months.

Yes, the courts have said they will not rely solely on CCTV footage, how are Police able to justify the man hours, and money lost in the failed prosecution of someone, whose apparent victim doesn’t want to go ahead with the matter?

Farq, you’ve admitted on this site a long time ago that you’re just a troll. Since that time, it’s difficult to take any of your comments seriously. Yes, it’s fun to try to get a rise out of people sometimes, but when it’s all the time, it loses its effectiveness, especially when the material is old.

dvaey, seriously, if you want to know how the system works, you need to do your own research, as you clearly have no idea how the legal system works (maybe start by looking up the definition of assault, proofs of the offence, defences etc). Stop asking me to spell out the basics for you. If I thought anything was getting through to you, I’d probably pick apart your last post as well, but I’m not going to waste my time, to be honest.

bigred: you seem like a very angry man. Why, I’m not sure. You obviously have some strange, rabid hatred of the police (even talking about them when it’s off-topic, like in the ACTION thread; sitting outside the Weston complex watching employees leave etc). Whatever the reason, if you want your posts taken seriously, maybe just dial back the rage a little bit.

Tooks, you really have no idea of how this town operates. Are you a sworn member, or merely the janitor at the Winchester centre?

farq said :

Tooks said :

If you make a complaint about a police member, then you would expect them to treat it seriously and investigate thoroughly (and rightly so). Yet you baulk at having to provide a couple of basic details about the incident (rego, licence number) – also known as evidence.

You only have to look at the recent Birch case to see how the AFP look after their own.

But seriously, I can’t imagine that you expected them to take your complaint seriously. The police protect each other to the bitter end.

He went to court didn’t he, if I’m not mistaken. Quite a few Police have gone before the courts, prosecuted BY POLICE, which really puts your points to be bed quite convincingly.

Good to see the conspiracy theory, anti police crowd sticking together here to the bitter end.

dvaey, sorry you have absolutely no idea of the rules of evidence or law beyond what you see on CSI. Here’s a hot tip, most of what you see there is not how the REAL WORLD works.

Its funny how the anti police crowd talk about Police not wanting the workload, so they talk people out of complaints, etc, etc. I challenge any of you to attend the courts on any given day to see the apparent work dodging Police do ……. last I heard there was a backlog of cases before the court, with courts struggling to cope with matters !!!!

Sounds like job dodging to me … NOT – pfft trolls

Tooks said :

“I havent been to these establishments in a while, and maybe its a crazy idea, but I heard somewhere theres these things called CCTV cameras, and that if someone commits a crime on camera, you have evidence without a complainant.”

*Sigh* I get the feeling I could sit here all day trying to explain this to you.

1) Yes, with CCTV you might have evidence, but without a complainant, so what? Unless the complainant is the AFP and they are charging people with fighting in a public place, it’s useless.
2) There is no mention of anyone being assaulted (ever heard of amicable contest?)

1) Why do you need a complainant for a criminal case? If a crime has been committed, isnt it up to the police and the prosecution to go through the court process, with a ‘complainant’ really only being used as a witness?

2) From OP: “Around 4.20am, City Beats Teams conducting routine patrols observed a large number of males punching each other and wielding bottles as weapons in East Row. Police observed bottles used as missiles and impact weapons, resulting in injuries. … One police officer received minor injuries in the melee.”

Punching each other, throwing bottles and a police officer being injured dont count as assault? Have you been reading the Higgins book of justice?

Tooks said :

If you make a complaint about a police member, then you would expect them to treat it seriously and investigate thoroughly (and rightly so). Yet you baulk at having to provide a couple of basic details about the incident (rego, licence number) – also known as evidence.

If I was involved in the incident, that would be understandable, however I was in front of a shop, not in my vehicle at the time it happened, how is my car rego and licence number relevant?

Tooks said :

If you make a complaint about a police member, then you would expect them to treat it seriously and investigate thoroughly (and rightly so). Yet you baulk at having to provide a couple of basic details about the incident (rego, licence number) – also known as evidence.

You only have to look at the recent Birch case to see how the AFP look after their own.

But seriously, I can’t imagine that you expected them to take your complaint seriously. The police protect each other to the bitter end.

“The only time Ive ever gotten this feeling, was while making a complaint ABOUT police, not TO police. For normal criminal activity theyll normally listen to your complaint, but for police activity expect to have to justify every comment and then provide more information than should need to be known to file a complaint. (Why do you need to know my car rego and licence number, when Im reporting rude language and actions by a member?).”

If you make a complaint about a police member, then you would expect them to treat it seriously and investigate thoroughly (and rightly so). Yet you baulk at having to provide a couple of basic details about the incident (rego, licence number) – also known as evidence.

“I havent been to these establishments in a while, and maybe its a crazy idea, but I heard somewhere theres these things called CCTV cameras, and that if someone commits a crime on camera, you have evidence without a complainant.”

*Sigh* I get the feeling I could sit here all day trying to explain this to you.

1) Yes, with CCTV you might have evidence, but without a complainant, so what? Unless the complainant is the AFP and they are charging people with fighting in a public place, it’s useless.
2) There is no mention of anyone being assaulted (ever heard of amicable contest?)
3) If someone is assaulted and they don’t want any action taken against their attacker, then you cannot force a victim to make a statement, then make them go to court against their will. Doesn’t matter if there are 20 witnesses, CCTV etc.

Tooks said :

You don’t think the victim should have a say? If someone doesn’t want to make a statement and (possibly) go to court, then there’s not much point forcing the issue.

The other issue in a big brawl like this one, might be identity. Who did what to who etc.

I havent been to these establishments in a while, and maybe its a crazy idea, but I heard somewhere theres these things called CCTV cameras, and that if someone commits a crime on camera, you have evidence without a complainant.

Spideydog said :

DV incidents and a pub fight are two different matters entirely. I am sure you can use your imagination to see why Police are sometimes required to act on behalf of DV victims, when they won’t do it themselves

My imagination says that DV incidents happen in private, where pub fights are on video. Whether the victim assists police or not, doesnt change the fact that police can identify who did what, without needing heresay.

bigred said :

Come on, we all know significant effort is made talking people out of continuing with complaints to reduce workload.

The only time Ive ever gotten this feeling, was while making a complaint ABOUT police, not TO police. For normal criminal activity theyll normally listen to your complaint, but for police activity expect to have to justify every comment and then provide more information than should need to be known to file a complaint. (Why do you need to know my car rego and licence number, when Im reporting rude language and actions by a member?).

bigred said :

Come on, we all know significant effort is made talking people out of continuing with complaints to reduce workload.

You are just a troll, aren’t you? There’s no way you could really be this ignorant.

PrinceOfAles said :

Tooks they were caught red handed by the police. If the police SEE someone committing a murder you can sure as hell bet they will be charged. No complainant with murder. Assault is a serious crime that the government, police and the courts need to get a whole lot tougher on.

Comparing murder with a common assault is ridiculous.

You have to prove the offence of assault too. If you have two (or more) willing participants, thats not an assault, it’s fight in public place.

These things aren’t as black and white as you are making out. You need witnesses, people willing to make statements and/or complaint and evidence to prove the offences.

Come on, we all know significant effort is made talking people out of continuing with complaints to reduce workload.

PrinceOfAles said :

Tooks they were caught red handed by the police. If the police SEE someone committing a murder you can sure as hell bet they will be charged. No complainant with murder. Assault is a serious crime that the government, police and the courts need to get a whole lot tougher on.

They were caught red handed being intoxicated and disorderly in a public place, which is what they were arrested for. Go and sit in the magistrates court one day and see how many assault charges they deal with there, then tell me police aren’t tough on assaults (you may have a point about courts being tougher with sentencing though).

Was I talking about murder, or was I talking about a fairly common street fight? Do I really need to point out that a murder victim cannot provide a statement?

If no one wants to provide a victim statement in relation to *this* incident, then it’s up to the police who were at the incident to determine who punched who, whacked who with a bottle etc.

Tooks they were caught red handed by the police. If the police SEE someone committing a murder you can sure as hell bet they will be charged. No complainant with murder. Assault is a serious crime that the government, police and the courts need to get a whole lot tougher on.

PrinceOfAles said :

DJ said :

You’ll need a complainant….

Why is this? I understand that in domestic violence cases the police can prosecute even when the woman does not want to press charges. Why can`t this be the case with common assault?

DV incidents and a pub fight are two different matters entirely. I am sure you can use your imagination to see why Police are sometimes required to act on behalf of DV victims, when they won’t do it themselves

PrinceOfAles said :

DJ said :

You’ll need a complainant….

Why is this? I understand that in domestic violence cases the police can prosecute even when the woman does not want to press charges. Why can`t this be the case with common assault?

You don’t think the victim should have a say? If someone doesn’t want to make a statement and (possibly) go to court, then there’s not much point forcing the issue.

The other issue in a big brawl like this one, might be identity. Who did what to who etc.

DJ said :

You’ll need a complainant….

Why is this? I understand that in domestic violence cases the police can prosecute even when the woman does not want to press charges. Why can`t this be the case with common assault?

bd84 said :

Bewildering that you can get drunk and start beating each other up with weapons, get arrested and not be charged.

Perhaps the cops have seen that the courts will do nothing and thus won’t waste their own time or the courts…

Bewildering that you can get drunk and start beating each other up with weapons, get arrested and not be charged.

If the Government was serious about discouraging people from getting off their face drunk, people being picked up and taken to the watch house “for their own safety” should automatically receive a fine of at least $200 for the time the police took to deal with them and for the bed for the night. Taking people into custody for being drunk to allow them to sleep over night only to smile and wave as they leave in the morning isn’t teaching anybody anything other than I don’t have to pay for a taxi home.

milkman said :

Special G said :

Drunk and disorderly – not a crime
Breach of the peace – yeah you can be charged but if you are happy to sign an undertaking then you get let go.
Melee – a law that is in most other states in Australia but seriously lacking in the ACT.

What about the ‘assault’ bit?

You’ll need a complainant….

Jethro – you may be going to hell! Have a search through local legislation if you like – might even learn something!

C’mon milky discretion is used and it looks like you think people have gotten away with something? I’m guessing you have assumed the facts of the incident… unless you were there?

East Row eh. Hard to believe it wasn’t out the front of mooseheads. I guess Shooters is trying to get in on the act of worst nightclub in Canberra.

Special G said :

Drunk and disorderly – not a crime
Breach of the peace – yeah you can be charged but if you are happy to sign an undertaking then you get let go.
Melee – a law that is in most other states in Australia but seriously lacking in the ACT.

What about the ‘assault’ bit?

Special G said :

Drunk and disorderly – not a crime

Unless you’re an Aborigine living on Palm Island (QLD), where it’s punishable by the death sentence.

Surely, though, using beer bottles as weapons has to be against the law in some form in the ACT.

Drunk and disorderly – not a crime
Breach of the peace – yeah you can be charged but if you are happy to sign an undertaking then you get let go.
Melee – a law that is in most other states in Australia but seriously lacking in the ACT.

Hank said :

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Is it just me or does “City Beats Team” sound like a breakdancing group?

HAHAHA they’re break-dance fighting!

Brilliant

“All seven men taken into protective custody at the ACT Watch House for being intoxicated and disorderly were released without charge later in the day.”

Translation: get pissed and into a fight in a public place and you won’t get charged, despite getting caught red-handed.

Is it just me, or should the seven men taken into protective custody at the ACT Watch House for being intoxicated and disorderly have been charged with being drunk and disorderly, disturbing the peace, or maybe even participating in the melee?
(are any of the above even a crime any more? I’m too lazy to google them..)

I wasn’t there, so I’m probably speaking out of turn. Maybe these gentlemen were totally innocent bystanders. But it seems to me not too many weeks goes by now where we don’t here of a fight outside nightlubs in Civic. And unless, the police start cracking down on those involved, I can’t see it changing..

Or perhaps there should be a crackdown on the responsible service of alcohol in certain establishments..

colourful sydney racing identity said :

Is it just me or does “City Beats Team” sound like a breakdancing group?

HAHAHA they’re break-dance fighting!

Is it just me or does “City Beats Team” sound like a breakdancing group?