Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Rivett lock-down based on a lie.

johnboy 26 April 2006 7

The ABC is reporting that the sensational lock-down of the Suburb of Rivett earlier this month was based on bullshit.

Today, the girlfriend of 41-year-old Sammy Strano told the court she lied to police by telling them he had threatened her with a gun.

Well she’s done a great disservice to every imperiled woman in future hasn’t she?

UPDATED: The Canberra Times has more coverage on this.

Strano pleaded guilty yesterday to one count of damaging property, but not guilty to charges of intentionally threatening to kill someone, possessing a drug of dependence, receiving stolen property, unlawfully possessing stolen property and cultivating cannabis.

He had gone there to move some cars.

He described the incident as a verbal argument with his “missus” after which he had smashed some car windows.

But Strano said he did not make any threats towards her.

In a statement tendered for the bail application, police alleged an argument broke out between Strano and Ms Quinn about three of his cars that were parked on the front verge of her premises.

What’s Your opinion?

Please login to post your comments, or connect with
7 Responses to
Rivett lock-down based on a lie.
Showing only Website comments
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
vg 9:56 am 27 Apr 06

One word…………..liar

johnboy 9:17 am 27 Apr 06

I think you’ll find locking down whole suburbs on a regular basis on the back of hoaxes would, with the best will in the world, warrant a re-evaluation of procedure.

People will grin and bear it with the odd whinge if it’s achieving something real. But if the perception becomes that it’s just another dippy woman seeking revenge on her boyfriend (note: PERCEPTION) then I doubt it would even require the Minister for Police to pick up the phone.

And that’d be a great shame.

Binker 12:24 am 27 Apr 06

Maybe she considered that she may be “undermining the response to people under serious threat of violence” and then compared it with her alternative of being chopped up and fed to the pigs or taking half a litre of acid to the face and decided that the possibly quite ephemeral benefit of not “undermining the response to people under serious threat of violence” (as well as any formal penalty for perjury) didn’t compare favourably, and thought maybe she wouldn’t be taking one for the team this time.

I’m not stating this is what occurred, but with the little that is known publicly about the circumstances, a dichotomous analysis is not (yet) warranted.

It also should be noted that the professionalism of the services that assist in these types of cases is such that an allegation and then retraction is unlikely to affect future responses. Each new case will be assessed on its merits (in the brief period of time available) and a response will issue where resources are available.

It’s a grey old world out there.

johnboy 11:01 pm 26 Apr 06

in which case she’s perjuring herself and and still undermining the response to people under serious threat of violence.

Binker 10:20 pm 26 Apr 06

Before one jumps to malign the lass in question it maybe that she received a few credible phone calls advising her that it would be in her long term best interests to make sure any prosecution of SS doesn’t succeed. On the other hand maybe she reconciled with SS and it’s all happy families again.

schmerica 10:14 pm 26 Apr 06

Silly bitch.

TAD 9:25 pm 26 Apr 06

Yes a definite smell of bullshit with this one. Me thinks the bullshit is fresh though.

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Copyright © 2019 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved. | | |

Search across the site