Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index
 The RulesThe Rules FAQFAQ
   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   CalendarCalendar   SearchSearch 
Log inLog in RegisterRegister
 
Police accountability

Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Victoria Park Tavern
 
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
K 



Joined: 09 Sep 2011


PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 4:19 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

David wrote:
I have to say I’m not sure how to take some of this questioning – because some criminals are dangerous, or disrespectful, or make police officers’ jobs difficult, does that in any way make unprofessional responses acceptable?...

Yes, some of the questioning sounds like whataboutery or score-keeping, when it's not the same people who are victims and attackers. Poor Dimopoulos and Nehal were just innocent victims, not members of "African gangs", etc., and there's no indication the police who assaulted them had been previously assaulted by members of "African gangs", etc.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw 



Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 8:39 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Many years ago, the people two doors up from our old house were raided by the police.

These were kind, caring people who would do anything for you - a young family of 5. The police busted down the door, threatened them with guns and dealt with the father quite violently.

The allegation was that the father (who was a computer technician) had been doing the book-keeping for an "illegal" tobacco "racket".

He and various other members of his extended family were tried in the County Court. The case ultimately collapsed.

But, even if it had not (and even if there had been some basic investigatory merit to what the police had been doing), the raid was violent and unnecessary and left ordinary people fearful. The police had had this gentle member of the "gang" under covert surveillance using an under-cover fellow and had been, as it turned out, watching him and his family from the front room of the home of the elderly couple across the street from us. The police well knew that the family they targeted had nothing to do with any dangerous behaviour (these were, at most, State duty offences). At worst, if the police had been correct about what was happening, they wanted to see the father's spreadsheets - he was a quite peripheral figure. Even if he were a criminal (and he wasn't), he was neither dangerous nor violent.

When I read about it in the press after the raids - but of course before the acquittals, the noises being made were about "gangs" and "rackets" and all sorts of other pejorative terms that, for me, conjured up images of the Mafia - you know mobsters, executions, concrete shoes, gun-running and the whole bit. None of it was capable of being reconciled with the people I had known then for the best part of a decade and, of course, none of it bore any relation to the actual facts of that case.

It's quite possible to execute search warrants without breaking down doors, pointing guns at young children, pistol-whipping their parents and causing injuries. Yet, when these things go wrong, they tend to be justified by suggestions that police didn't know what they were getting themselves into and needed to take precautions against possible dangers. Given modern surveillance techniques and the way such investigations are conducted - and what police can, usually do and in any event always should know about people before they execute such a raid, that is typically nonsense. If you want to exercise extraordinary powers in a very heavy-handed way, you'd want to be able to justify the decision to exercise those powers in that way in the particular circumstances of that case. Not by reference to generalised concerns that the police have a difficult or sometimes dangerous job.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
think positive Libra

Side By Side


Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere

PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 8:46 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

David wrote:
I have to say I’m not sure how to take some of this questioning – because some criminals are dangerous, or disrespectful, or make police officers’ jobs difficult, does that in any way make unprofessional responses acceptable? Obviously police officers are only human, lose their cool and make mistakes; but if such mistakes include a serious physical assault, or treatment of a non-white person as a second-class citizen, or assuming guilt based on skin colour, or general abuse of power, then my view is simply that those incidents should be treated seriously and not brushed under the carpet, and a police force that is unable to be made accountable loses credibility, as I’ve discussed above.

Intentionally or otherwise, a lot of the responses here really sound a lot like apologism, and seem to suggest an over-eagerness to defend police against imagined slights.



No no no no no

Yourfirst line says you won’t look at the other side, I’m just pointing out the other side, I have never said any of the reactions or action of police in these cases is acceptable, it’s not. I have felt that the vibe here is there are too many cops looking for trouble, deliberately over reaching, or taking advantage of their powers, you clearly have low regard for, not much respect for, police in general. Your comments like defend police against imagined slights, stuff like that, I find that pretty disgusting.

Police are human beings, not super heroes, just normal every day people with the same worries and fears as everyone else,and in one week they probably see more scary shit than you see in a lifetime, and yet you look down on them. Yes you do David, you know that as a person I like and respect you, but, I hate the word but, but it’s the one I need, you have a disdain for authority of any kind.

If you want a thread like this to be taken seriously you need balance. Yes, there are rogue cops, but none of the actions I’ve commented on here were done by rogue cops, just poor decisions, of which every human on the planet is guilty of. Yes some of the, are indeed worthy of punishment of some kind.

A couple of weeks back I was watching the ambulance show, the ambulance had the sign on the back ‘it’s never ok to assault paramedics’ or something like that, and a car drove up to them at the lights, in full view of the cameras, and the guy yelled out, it will always be ok to assault paramedics like you. Both of them had tears in their eyes, and so did I.

While we have this total lack of respect for those in our community who are trying to help and protect us, you are gonig to get stressed emergency personnel who lash out when they shouldn’t, it’s human nature. I doubt very much wether there is any one in the service without some level of PSD. we all have had something in life happen that’s remote to us, but we still feel oh wow, that hits home, it doesn’t have to be a direct hit.

Why do you expect these people to be immune to such things? Respect is a two way street, and the general public often have a lot to answer for, just go to the footy and watch what the cops doing the aisle runs have to ignore.

_________________
You never look good trying to make someone else look bad. Disrespecting & insulting other to prove your point just shows how shaky your own position is.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
think positive Libra

Side By Side


Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere

PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 8:52 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Pies4shaw wrote:
Many years ago, the people two doors up from our old house were raided by the police.

These were kind, caring people who would do anything for you - a young family of 5. The police busted down the door, threatened them with guns and dealt with the father quite violently.

The allegation was that the father (who was a computer technician) had been doing the book-keeping for an "illegal" tobacco "racket".

He and various other members of his extended family were tried in the County Court. The case ultimately collapsed.

But, even if it had not (and even if there had been some basic investigatory merit to what the police had been doing), the raid was violent and unnecessary and left ordinary people fearful. The police had had this gentle member of the "gang" under covert surveillance using an under-cover fellow and had been, as it turned out, watching him and his family from the front room of the home of the elderly couple across the street from us. The police well knew that the family they targeted had nothing to do with any dangerous behaviour (these were, at most, State duty offences). At worst, if the police had been correct about what was happening, they wanted to see the father's spreadsheets - he was a quite peripheral figure. Even if he were a criminal (and he wasn't), he was neither dangerous nor violent.

When I read about it in the press after the raids - but of course before the acquittals, the noises being made were about "gangs" and "rackets" and all sorts of other pejorative terms that, for me, conjured up images of the Mafia - you know mobsters, executions, concrete shoes, gun-running and the whole bit. None of it was capable of being reconciled with the people I had known then for the best part of a decade and, of course, none of it bore any relation to the actual facts of that case.

It's quite possible to execute search warrants without breaking down doors, pointing guns at young children, pistol-whipping their parents and causing injuries. Yet, when these things go wrong, they tend to be justified by suggestions that police didn't know what they were getting themselves into and needed to take precautions against possible dangers. Given modern surveillance techniques and the way such investigations are conducted - and what police can, usually do and in any event always should know about people before they execute such a raid, that is typically nonsense. If you want to exercise extraordinary powers in a very heavy-handed way, you'd want to be able to justify the decision to exercise those powers in that way in the particular circumstances of that case. Not by reference to generalised concerns that the police have a difficult or sometimes dangerous job.


That is certainly an over reaction, the powers that be that gave the order should have been investigated. That comes from the top.

_________________
You never look good trying to make someone else look bad. Disrespecting & insulting other to prove your point just shows how shaky your own position is.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw 



Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 9:17 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

^ Yes, most of it does. When police "raid", they don't just have a ciggy together behind Fitzroy police station and decide that they've got not much on so they'll organise a posse and raid someone that afternoon. There are checks and balances that are supposed to be applied before such investigatory actions are taken. Generally, it's not the police who do the raid that we should be concerned about - by the time they arrive, a certain process has been put in motion and a particular, chaotic dynamic is created that informs how the police on site must respond. Mostly, I see these as "command" concerns about the process by which such serious measures are ordered.

I think one can always be sensible about things, too. If there is, eg, an active terrorist threat and police have information that suggests particular people may be involved, we probably expect the police to be swift to make a judgement about whether a raid may be necessary. With common or garden (even violent) criminal activity, though, it's difficult to see how precipitate and erroneous action could ever have been reasonably necessary.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
K 



Joined: 09 Sep 2011


PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 9:36 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

What happened to your neighbour (apart from being exonerated)?
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
think positive Libra

Side By Side


Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere

PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 9:59 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Pies4shaw wrote:
^ Yes, most of it does. When police "raid", they don't just have a ciggy together behind Fitzroy police station and decide that they've got not much on so they'll organise a posse and raid someone that afternoon. There are checks and balances that are supposed to be applied before such investigatory actions are taken. Generally, it's not the police who do the raid that we should be concerned about - by the time they arrive, a certain process has been put in motion and a particular, chaotic dynamic is created that informs how the police on site must respond. Mostly, I see these as "command" concerns about the process by which such serious measures are ordered.

I think one can always be sensible about things, too. If there is, eg, an active terrorist threat and police have information that suggests particular people may be involved, we probably expect the police to be swift to make a judgement about whether a raid may be necessary. With common or garden (even violent) criminal activity, though, it's difficult to see how precipitate and erroneous action could ever have been reasonably necessary.


totally agree, have to take in to consideration that we dont know what they troops have been told too though. or maybe ive watched fugitive 2 too often!

_________________
You never look good trying to make someone else look bad. Disrespecting & insulting other to prove your point just shows how shaky your own position is.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
stui magpie 

Oh the Premiership's a cakewalk


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: preparing the Pilosocereus suppository

PostPosted: Wed May 15, 2019 7:42 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

David wrote:
I have to say I’m not sure how to take some of this questioning – because some criminals are dangerous, or disrespectful, or make police officers’ jobs difficult, does that in any way make unprofessional responses acceptable? Obviously police officers are only human, lose their cool and make mistakes; but if such mistakes include a serious physical assault, or treatment of a non-white person as a second-class citizen, or assuming guilt based on skin colour, or general abuse of power, then my view is simply that those incidents should be treated seriously and not brushed under the carpet, and a police force that is unable to be made accountable loses credibility, as I’ve discussed above.

Intentionally or otherwise, a lot of the responses here really sound a lot like apologism, and seem to suggest an over-eagerness to defend police against imagined slights.


Interesting how roles can swap dependant on the topic.

Look, I'm not justifying or apologising for bad behaviour. Your views on treatment of minorities and your anti authoritarian beliefs are both well documented and are colouring your language.

I have no issue with Police being held accountable, IBAC is one body that does that and there are other mechanisms.

You said in another post that "because some criminals disrespect Police...." which is a crock. Society in general has become a lot less respectful of authority. Ask a school teacher.

I'll maintain that instances like the examples being used are exceptions or outliers when viewed against the vast number of Police actions that take place daily. That doesn't mean they should be brushed under the carpet and not looked at properly and independently, but it also doesn't mean that every cop should be considered as like those in the examples.

I grew up friendly with the local cops, and I also had the living suitcase punched out of me by some outside the old Russel St headquarters in the late 80's. I support them and the difficult job they have to do.

_________________
Arguing with an idiot is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter how good you are, the bird is going to knock over the pieces, shit on the board and strut around like it won anyway.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
ronrat 



Joined: 22 May 2006
Location: Thailand

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 3:06 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

Many years ago one Christmas I was walking form Bensons (when Daics had it) to the other side of Richmond station. 2 youths, about 16, pulled a knife and demanded I hand over my wallet. Full of beer I noticed the one with the knife had his head about 4 inches from the wall so I decked him he smashed his head into the wall. His mate took off towards punt road. This other dude was still holding the knife so I jumped on his wrist and I heard it snap. Then I delivered about 6 or 7 kicks into his ribs , took the knife and threw it on the train tracks.I then gave him another kick in the back and he limped off.

I rang the cops and 2 coppers one male, one female turned up. Told them what they were wearing , descriptions etc and there was a massive pool of blood where I had belted his nose. The male copper asked me where I had been, told him, it was only about 6 ish and had some mates still at Bensons. He said he would look for the knife but probably just idiot kids and said "well mate, you may have deterred them from a life of crime" Then radioed in to see if anyone turned up at casualty. Said go back, have a few beers with your mates and look after yourself'

Policewoman Pollyanna was a different case. "I hope you didn't hurt him too much' "Why didn't you talk to them" "I hope we won't have to charge you fro assault" "Do you think he was in pain, he is probably frightened' "lets go look for him , he might need treatment' My answer was basically "If you want to waste Police and court time on this go ahead and find the prick but I won't be worried. I hope he is badly hurt, he can go and tell his proud parents how tough he was a knife and got the crap beaten out of".

The male copper said "I am not going to bother the boss with this. We have his name. I doubt anyone will be pressing charges" Enough trouble around Richmond on the friday before Xmas to worry about self defence cases. Dakes lent me a shirt because my white shirt was covered in blood and I brought it back on Boxing day after I washed it.

_________________
Annoying opposition supporters since 1967.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw 



Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 6:36 am
Post subject: Reply with quote

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-15/officer-tasered-driver-in-fremantle-random-breath-test/11114708

"Senior Constable Grantley James Keenan's conduct on the night of March 31, 2017, became the subject of a Corruption and Crime Commission (CCC) investigation, after he was cleared of any wrongdoing by three earlier internal police investigations.

...

A mobile phone video taken by his passenger showed Mr Bartlett then being tasered as he sat in the driver's seat with his seatbelt on.

Keenan was charged with two counts of common assault. He admitted to tasering the man but denied it was unlawful.

But he was convicted after a two-day trial in the Perth Magistrates Court, and was released on bail until he is sentenced in June."
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
stui magpie 

Oh the Premiership's a cakewalk


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: preparing the Pilosocereus suppository

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 6:14 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

It's hardly uncommon for a union to go on the front foot to defend their members, but this is an interesting take on things.

Quote:
Victoria's police union boss says he is "proud" of the way officers handled a pre-dawn raid of a Fitzroy home that left a man with a severely broken arm in a terrible case of mistaken identity.

Police Association secretary Wayne Gatt told radio station 3AW on Thursday morning that officers in the Critical Incident Response Team were being pre-judged and the facts of the arrest, particularly claims that officers did not declare themselves, were being distorted.


Even if the facts are being distorted, I'm not sure if "proud" is the term I'd use. Even if the guy was the bloke they wanted and he was dangerous, he was unarmed and that's a pretty serious break,

Quote:
Contrary to claims from the residents, sources have told The Age police announced themselves three times as they stormed the building........."They took every attempt to engage with people in the building. They can't be responsible for people running."




Quote:
Heavily armed CIRT officers were led by a helicopter and then a sniffer dog to the apartment above well-known gay community bookshop Hares & Hyenas on Johnston Street, Fitzroy, about 2am last Saturday.

They were searching for what residents were told was an "armed member of a 'Lebanese' gang".

Resident Nik Dimopoulos ran, with friends saying he feared he was the target of a hate crime, before he was tackled by police and arrested on the footpath.


So someone runs away from Police, is tackled hard onto concrete and breaks his arm. There's an argument that if you believe the person is armed and dangerous, that's reasonable action. They didn't bash him, just tackled him and the break was accidental. Still not sure if "proud" is the right term though. I do find the excuse for running interesting though, that's not a normal instinctive reaction unless you've been a target before.

Quote:
Victoria's Independent Broad-based Anti-corruption Commission and police's own Professional Standards Command are investigating the incident,


So IBAC is investigating, as I suggested they could. Surely having an independent body investigating ensures accountability?

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/police-union-boss-proud-of-officers-handling-of-fitzroy-arrest-20190516-p51nwb.html

_________________
Arguing with an idiot is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter how good you are, the bird is going to knock over the pieces, shit on the board and strut around like it won anyway.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw 



Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 6:51 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Only if they're competent and their powers are adequate.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
stui magpie 

Oh the Premiership's a cakewalk


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: preparing the Pilosocereus suppository

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 7:27 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

I think their powers are adequate.

Quote:
Our investigative powers
We have powers to effectively investigate allegations of public sector corruption and police misconduct, including being able to:

compel the production of documents and objects
enter and search premises
seize documents and objects
use surveillance devices
intercept telecommunications
hold private and public hearings
require people to give evidence at a hearing.


https://www.ibac.vic.gov.au/investigating-corruption/our-investigative-powers

They've also got form in investigating Police.

https://www.ibac.vic.gov.au/investigating-corruption/past-investigation-summaries

_________________
Arguing with an idiot is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter how good you are, the bird is going to knock over the pieces, shit on the board and strut around like it won anyway.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Pies4shaw 



Joined: 08 Oct 2007


PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 9:32 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

Seriously? You’re reading about their investigative powers on their website?

This is the legal equivalent of going into your English exam having only read the blurb on the back of The Mayor of Casterbridge.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
stui magpie 

Oh the Premiership's a cakewalk


Joined: 03 May 2005
Location: preparing the Pilosocereus suppository

PostPosted: Thu May 16, 2019 9:45 pm
Post subject: Reply with quote

You have an alternative source which says different?
_________________
Arguing with an idiot is like playing chess with a pigeon. No matter how good you are, the bird is going to knock over the pieces, shit on the board and strut around like it won anyway.
Back to top  
View user's profile Send private message  
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board Forum Index -> Victoria Park Tavern All times are GMT + 10 Hours

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 3 of 5   

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum



Privacy Policy

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group