Police "Us And Them" Mentality Alienates The Public They Serve

The dishonest and vindictive arrest of Andrea Turner is sadly, one of many instances of police aggression toward ordinary citizens. It is actions like this which reinforce public opinion that the police do not see themselves as part of the general community.

The police clearly have an “us and them” mentality, reasonable when dealing with professional criminals, but inappropriate when dealing with the general public. That they refer to themselves as a police “force” rather than a police “service” is telling. That this attitude is so ingrained within police culture must be the fault of senior management.

Particularly bad in this case is the absurdly false charge of “photographing a police officer in the course of their duty”. It is unsurprising that aggressive police would try this on: it gives them a pretext for destroying evidence of police wrongdoing, for example if they were filmed using excessive force.

Photographing or filming police is not per se a criminal offence. If it were, how could citizens ever gain objective evidence against police if they act outside their powers?

Aside from the corruption and venal aggression toward a clearly innocent member of the public, there are three other factors in this matter pertinent to the evaporation of public respect for and trust in the police service: cowardice, wasting resources and whitewashing complaints.

Cowardice because the officers decided to pick on someone they clearly perceived as a soft target.

Wasting resources because, by my reading of the article, there were at least two uniformed officers originally present, with three more called for back up and an additional five who decided for some reason to turn up, including two detectives who should have been investigating a real crime.

Whitewashing complaints because none of the police officers involved has been reprimanded over the incident and there has been no internal investigation, despite the judge clearly expressing the opinion that one of the officers involved had committed a criminal offence by falsifying a public record, namely the description of events surrounding the arrest.

Why has this officer not been charged? Any citizen would be. If police intentionally abuse their power, they must be brought to account. If they intentionally break the law, they must be prosecuted, as you or I certainly would.

Equally important, why haven’t the names of these corrupt police been published? They have not been charged, nor does any prosecution appear likely, so publication of their identities is not sub judice. In fact, their names were read in open court during Andrea Turner’s civil suit against the police.

Read the mealy mouthed response of the Sydney Morning Herald journalist, Belinda Kontominas in response to the question of why she didn’t publish their names.

In fact, there is a comment by Andrea Turner on the above page specifically naming the two officers who tried to illegally arrest her on the train:

Elisha Anne Bullock, Belinda Kaye Hocroft, both of Hurstville Police Station.

Given the malicious nature of the arrest for a non existent crime, I do not see how these two police officers can hide behind the uniform and have the NSW Police defend their conduct as an error in the line of duty. The law should allow the officers to be sued personally in events such as this.

In the absence of such a course of action, the best censure and defence society has against a repeat of similar corrupt, thuggish police behaviour is public exposure. Spread the names of these dishonest police across the media so that everyone who encounters them knows what they have done and can deal with them accordingly.

The police regularly ruin reputations, careers and even lives with false charges, yet fight tooth and nail when there are calls for criminal behaviour by police to be prosecuted according to the law. This hypocrisy has been a major factor in eroding public trust in the police service.

What most citizens primarily want from the police is simple: an environment safe from theft and violence and the law enforced honestly. Pursue criminal gangs and prevent violent morons from bashing and robbing people.

If the police saw most members of the community as sharing this common goal, they may find allies, rather than a distrustful “them”.

Drunken Teenager Challenged Police To Shoot Him ... So They Did

Apparently there are circumstances in which it is reasonable conduct for 3 well armed police officers to shoot to kill a 15 year old boy armed with two knives. At least, that’s what the Victorian coroner seems to believe.

In an act of cynicism insulting not only to the dead boy’s family, but the intelligence of the general community, the police went even further and tried to argue “suicide by cop”: that the boy had in effect forced them to shoot him dead.

Bullshit, you lying scum. You recklessly killed a 15 year old child who clearly needed medical care.

I suspect the main reason for the police refusing to admit any culpability or even negligence is to avoid both civil and criminal liability. A deeply ingrained police culture of refusing to admit mistakes in almost any circumstance exacerbates the problem.

Some 15 year olds are (physically) almost men, but Tyler Cassidy wasn’t. Look at his picture. He was a boy, not a man.

He was waving a couple of big knives about and allegedly challenging the police to shoot him. I’m sure the police lawyer eagerly seized upon that. Well, if he TOLD the police to shoot him or he’d kill them, I guess they must have had no choice.

Four ADULT officers, armed with batons, capsicum spray and guns couldn’t disarm and subdue a 15 year old boy armed with two knives? Admittedly two of them were women, so at the risk of appearing sexist, maybe they were out of their depth physically (which begs the question as to why they were present).

How about the two male officers surrounding him, then one belts his forearm with an extendable baton, while another belts him across the back of the knee? I thought the police were trained in basic martial arts. They were apparently able to spray him with capsicum and avoid the “need” to shoot him for a period of more than one minute.

Even if the police really had to shoot, what possible justification is there in 3 officers pumping 5 shots, all aimed to kill into a teenage boy? Couldn’t one of them have just shot him in the thigh or the bum?

The coroner had the hide to say the police “acted within the limitations of their training”. Well, that’s OK then. If they aren’t trained to deal with such a situation, blast away.

Tyler Cassidy wasn’t a 200 pound, hardened criminal. He was a drunken, emotionally disturbed child. What “professional training” do you need to understand there were ways to resolve the situation other than shooting him five times?

How about common sense, empathy and a bit of guts?

Speaking of guts, do any of you have the courage to actually protect the community and go after some professional criminals? If there are no adverse findings for shooting a teenage boy, I’m sure you can justify shooting a few members of “Middle Eastern crime gangs” or “terrorism suspects” who “resist arrest”. Apparently it’s OK for them to shoot the police, so why not earn some real respect and get them first?

If the public felt like the police saw themselves as members of the community and saw them going after real threats, rather than soft targets, maybe we’d respect you and support your pay rise claims.

Vale Peter Roebuck ... Ya Dirty Old Perv

Peter Roebuck’s predilection for the overzealous caning of young boys appears to have finally caught up with him. Apparently, he leapt to his death from the balcony of his sixth floor hotel room while police were questioning him regarding a sexual assault complaint.

The South African police have refused to comment on the precise allegations which prompted their questioning of Roebuck. Given the nature of his previous conviction and his somewhat hasty departure from the hotel room, it’s unlikely the current complaint was your standard sportsman or politician pressuring a young woman into sex.

One can only speculate based on the available evidence, but it does look very much like he had been up to something pervy with young boys.

Vex News has a different take on events from the mainstream press, including excerpts from Roebuck’s 2001 trial:

In a statement, the victim said Roebuck told him: "I'm going to cane you now. Then it will be over and I will forgive you and, if I don't cane you, I will feel differently about you."

Roebuck asked the boy to bend over and delivered three "forceful strokes" over his clothing.

Roebuck then pulled the boy towards him, in what appeared to be an act of affection. He then asked if he could look at the marks on the boy's buttocks, something which he in fact did.

When passing sentence, the judge observed:

"It was not appropriate to administer corporal punishment to boys of this age in circumstances such as these. It seems so unusual that it must have been done to satisfy some need in you”.

Rumours about Peter Roebuck had been circulating in the cricket fraternity even before his conviction, particularly that he enjoyed caning little black and brown boys just a bit too much. In fact, Fingo and teammates were discussing this very topic at training only a few weeks ago.

It is not known whether Roebuck liked to soften the young bottoms up with a good reaming, prior to administering his brand of strictly applied corporal punishment, but I believe that is the standard “old school” method. Giving the boys a cuddle and inspecting the marks afterward adds a soupcon of idiosyncratic perversion; a fleeting whiff of the miasma which infested this man’s soul.

When coaching or teaching young boys, it is important to be able administer discipline efficiently. Below is an example of what RTBB will now call “The Roebuck Method”. With the aid of a step ladder, multiple boys can be reamed, then caned at the same time, with the resulting “train tracks” and snail trails easily inspected and documented.

The above method is rumoured to have been employed in the Knox Grammar School boarding house.

Perhaps Peter Roebuck’s ghost will haunt boarding houses around the globe. Teenage (and perhaps younger) boys will occasionally feel a ghostly swish across their bare buttocks as they step out of the shower or bend over to pick up their shoes.

Additionally, why are people heaping praise on his cricket journalism? He talked shit.