Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

4 Corners - Should Police investigate themselves?

Discussion in 'The Pub' at netrider.net.au started by Chef, Mar 7, 2012.

  1. r902708_9186341.

    Imagine you pick up the phone and call the Police, you want them to come to your house to help you protect your son from himself. They arrive and moments later they shoot him dead, while you're there, without provocation.

    Then they launch an investigation into themselves where one lie covers another, they even recommend they should receive 'special recognition' for performing their duties in an outstanding manner. The media spin machine goes into full flight with only the Police Force's 'official' press releases to go by, and of course the public believe everything they read. The Deputy State Coroner Scott Mitchell however believes otherwise...


    An extract of the story plus citations at the jump is here...

    "Closing Ranks", reported by Quentin McDermott and presented by Kerry O'Brien, goes to air on Monday 5th March at 8.30pm on ABC1. It is replayed on Tuesday 6th March at 11.35pm. You also watch it on ABC News 24 on Saturdays at 8.00pm, on iview or at abc.net.au/4corners.

    National Police Accountability Network


    Tamar Hopkins from the National Police Accountability Network believes the Police should not be in a position to investigate themselves, as the system is open to manipulation such as the story above. She goes on to say we should adopt a system such as the ones used in other countries where the Police are investigated independently. They are just as thorough and adequate if not more so, they are however unbiased.

    This raises a pertinent question for us, should the Crash Investigation Unit be responsible for investigating accidents and fatalities involving members of the Police Force? It may well pay to also ask, should Police pursuits involving fatalities be investigated by an independent body?

    We know the police are biased towards their own members, and we know they are very capable of lying and manipulating the judicial system to protect their own. Do we place more trust in them than they deserve?
  2. Police are nowhere near qualified to handle mental illness. They are as qualified as me sending an astronaut to the moon.
  3. I watched that the other night. There is no way police should investigate each other, it was a farce. I find it hard to accept the laws of this country when the enforcers behave the way they do.
  4. I think there are two points there:

    1. No, the police should not have the ability to investigate themselves. Regardless of any firewalls/chinese walls etc they not only need to be impartial but importantly need to be seen to be impartial. I think this is a tough gig when you are essentially under the same umbrella. As a NSW public servant I have enough faith to say that there can certainly be other gov't depts (with properly vetted staff) that would be able to conduct these investigations but certainly not the same dept or with the majority of the team sourced from the same force it is investigating.

    2. I'm not saying 4 Corners but a lot of the media really just present mini dramas based on actual events and more often than not are only one sided. Although I acknowledge that to fund these outlets you do need advertisers but dumbing down reports and focussing on the entertainment value to maintain ratings/readership is irresponsible and does nothing to inform the public of current issues in a manner where they can truly say they have been informed and make an intelligent assesment of the facts.
  5. Police are just people, people do stuff things up occationaly. Everyone has made a mistake at work, it's just that when a cop makes a mistake it can be fatal. Not many jobs require you to put your life on the line everyday like the police do, and then get paid less than most plumbers. It really has to be one of the hardest jobs out there; dealing with all the people no one else wants to deal with, being hated by most for doing their job. How many jobs have the possibility of jail for mistakes?

    Just saying...
  6. So, I'm assuming you have done courses in aerospace travel then, have you?

    Police do regular training in mental illness. They are trained in identifying, and treating mental illness as best as they can.

    Sure, it's not perfect. But don't blame the police. A lot of the time they are doing the best they can, with the resources they are afforded.
  7. Many jobs where you actually do stuff mechanics, drivers, doctors, builders all are held responsible for mistakes they make if there is loss of life, property or income or there is an injury. That is the most piss-weak argument ever. Self investigation allows political control over the outcome, this is unacceptable. The feds should be doing the investigation as it is the state, or one of it's agents, who has killed, maimed or otherwise harmed an Australian citizen. It is better for the cops who have done nothing wrong and it is better for citizens. There does need to be consideration taken for the stress involved and other circumstances, a bureaucrat is not the one to make those calls but a federal officer should be able to relate without undue bias or political pressure. It seems very simple to me :-s
  8. it's the behaviour of the police following the shooting which is the concern. I blame them for that. The coroner found them to be dishonest and the evidence proved it.
  9. The conflict of interest seems to be glaringly obvious... Or am I missing something?

  10. Not many mechanics or builders I know have to make split second life or death decisions on whether a wheel nut has been done up or not. They have the benefit of time. I'm all for making people responsible for their actions, but it needs to be looked at differently than most normal jobs. And should be judged by someone with the knowledge and experience to do so, not many people from outside the police have those abilities. Even having an ex-cop from an outside organisation would be seen as being biased. Like I said, bloody hard job, appreciated by not many, judged by everyone.
  11. Isn't the conflict of interest the reason the Vic government rejigged the part of VicPol that investigates police?
  12. Who polices the police?

    I dunno, the Coast Guard?
  13. Feds aren't cops? They are from a different jurisdiction, they are not reliant on the same individuals for budgets, promotion and appointment. You seem to think it is personal bias that is the problem, it is not, it is political and social pressure from both within the force and externally where justice gets subverted. You can't remove these forces but the system works to maximize their effect rather than minimize it. As to the split second decisions that is a somewhat valid point but the same "And should be judged by someone with the knowledge and experience to do so, not many people from outside the XXXX (XXXX could be- police, industry, profession) have those abilities." applies to a greater or lesser extent to all the occupations I listed. There are considerations of time, cost, efficiency, even standard industry practice in all cases, it is the one rule for you and another for me that gets people's backs up. Yes being in the job sucks, you couldn't pay me enough to do it, but that does not make cops immune from blame when they fuck up. When you take the emotion out of it the real question that should be asked is "is justice generally being served and when it is not is there a reasonable mode of redress". Then if not how can that be rectified?
  14. I'm at a loss as to what other media outlets has to do with this and why you would bring it into the discussion.
  15. Lying and covering up is not split second decision, Dsyfer. That is the issue, and it would be a big issue in any industry.
  16. The police have a level of expectation that goes with the job, that they can react appropriately and are trained properly.

    There are levels of mistakes, thing like typing the wrong thing for office workers and killing someone. Obviously killing someone cant be brushed off.

    Your typical police have the most basic training in handling people with mental illness, and its usually subduing them. How do I know? well its happened to a family member and has happened to many other people...................They are NOT trained in identifying or treating mental illness, they are not doctors or work in the field. Its the same with me knowing the very basic of how things fly (like your normal punter) but cant make or design rockets or things that fly (thats more complex than paper aeroplanes).

    Too right........................I cant see the truckers association or other truck drivers investigating and dishing out the punishment for a drunk driver who runs over a pedestrian or swerves to the wrong side of the road.........the police needs to be answerable to someone and should be investigated by someone outside the police force.

    Everyone drives or rides, we all make split second decisions daily, these decisions could cost up our lives or someone elses.................the thng is that if we **** up, we get investigated someone not a family member or someone that isnt biased towards us...............
  17. Cops are cops, doesn't matter what colour they are they only bleed blue. For the officers who have broken ranks and spoken out or blown the whistle in the past have ended their careers doing so. They get nothing but respect for their courage. It's a tiny percentage though.

    Anyway, figuring who should be investigating the Police Farce is secondary to the fact it should be done by and 'Independent outside organisation'. Outside meaning NO connection or ties with the Police force in any way.

    Why do the Police believe they are the only people capable of conducting investigations?

    Why do they believe their members are infallible or should be presented perceived and protected as infallible?

    How often do they come forward and openly admit one of their members has made a mistake?
  18. Precisely.

    This is not a story of mistakes, this is a story of systemic lying.
  19. Isn't that what the office of police integrity is for (OPI) to investigate the force?
  20. Don't even go there Mikey they're as bent as the rest of them.