Vic Police Minister caught speeding

[XR6TCraig]

Originally Posted by ltd

We had this guy at the height of his Napolean Bonaparte phase when as Police Commissioner he was security boss of the Sydney 2000 olympics. He set up his police integrity commission, which saw dozens of NSW police officers take their own lives.

While I was living in NSW during his time in Sydney, I don't know have any inside information into the full story in regard to Peter Ryan and the Integrety Commission, other than what was in the newpapers at the time.
What I dont understand, is why would an innocent police officer just up and take their own life if they have no reason to worry. Perhaps you can explain it to me.
Put it this way though. I don't consider killing myself every time I get audited by the ATO, because I have nothing to hide. Sure it makes me nervous because I may have inadvertently made an error, but not to the point of killing myself!

Perhaps death was a viable option for these fine upstanding members or the NSW police force because they were guilty of something and didn't want to face the music?
Perhaps they were not willing to face the consequences of being found out as being corrupt?

The NSW police force were widely known as a corrupt police force, the best police force that money can buy, prior to his reign. While perhaps the way that things were handled in overhauling it were not 100% in some areas, would you really prefer a corrupt police force?

As I said, I don't know any more than what was made public. Perhaps you are in the law enforcement idustry and do, but please don't paint this as a one sided argument where this figure head comes into power, and all of a sudden innocent people working under him decide its a good idea to neck themselves for some unknown reason. The fact that these people took there lives, speaks volumes of their guilt, not of the job being done by Ryan.

[ltd]

Originally Posted by Craiginmackay

While I was living in NSW during his time in Sydney, I don't know have any inside information into the full story in regard to Peter Ryan and the Integrety Commission, other than what was in the newpapers at the time.
What I dont understand, is why would an innocent police officer just up and take their own life if they have no reason to worry. Perhaps you can explain it to me.
Put it this way though. I don't consider killing myself every time I get audited by the ATO, because I have nothing to hide. Sure it makes me nervous because I may have inadvertently made an error, but not to the point of killing myself!

Perhaps death was a viable option for these fine upstanding members or the NSW police force because they were guilty of something and didn't want to face the music?
Perhaps they were not willing to face the consequences of being found out as being corrupt?

The NSW police force were widely known as a corrupt police force, the best police force that money can buy, prior to his reign. While perhaps the way that things were handled in overhauling it were not 100% in some areas, would you really prefer a corrupt police force?

As I said, I don't know any more than what was made public. Perhaps you are in the law enforcement idustry and do, but please don't paint this as a one sided argument where this figure head comes into power, and all of a sudden innocent people working under him decide its a good idea to neck themselves for some unknown reason. The fact that these people took there lives, speaks volumes of their guilt, not of the job being done by Ryan.

And this is the exact reason as to why officers took their own lives; because in the publics eyes they'd be thought to be guilty even when they weren't.
No offence, but you really shouldn't make judgements lest you have the facts.
There were dozens of cases of guilt by association. If you worked under a sergeant who was being investigated you were to front up and give evidence in yes or no format without explanation. Further, as this had the powers of a judicial enquiry several senior counsel led proceedings by asking leading questions which would not be accepted in any normal court. Those being questioned had to answer yes or no, and were not allowed to have counsel themselves. I'll give an example.

SC: "Would you say there is corruption in the police force, yes or no?"
Constable: "I wouldn't know of...."
SC: "I didn't ask that I asked yes or no"
Constable: "I guess maybe"
SC: "Yes or No?"
Constable: "Yes?"

SC: "Would you say Sergeant X is corrupt?"
Constable: "No"
SC: "But you just earlier said that there was corruption didn't you"
Constable: "Yes but it's not that....."
SC: "That's not what I asked and I've already told you to answer yes or no"
Constable: "But it's not that simple"
SC: "Again yes or no answers or I'll have you charged with contempt of this proceeding. I put it to you sergeant X is corrupt and I remind you of your previous answer on this question". Etc etc.

I've read transcripts of this, and let me tell you that no one I know of would have walked out of there unscathed. It wasn't fair then and isn't fair now.
The worst part is, most of these SC were former judges who have their own very checkered past including one notorious paedophile who took delight in taking down one very old sergeant who had busted him several times in various meetings at a certain wall.
In fact, if you have a look at underbelly 3 there is a little foray into this same enquiry as well as the same former judge.

[XR6TCraig]

Originally Posted by ltd

And this is the exact reason as to why officers took their own lives; because in the publics eyes they'd be thought to be guilty even when they weren't.
No offence, but you really shouldn't make judgements lest you have the facts.
There were dozens of cases of guilt by association. If you worked under a sergeant who was being investigated you were to front up and give evidence in yes or no format without explanation. Further, as this had the powers of a judicial enquiry several senior counsel led proceedings by asking leading questions which would not be accepted in any normal court. Those being questioned had to answer yes or no, and were not allowed to have counsel themselves.

As I already stated, things may have been able to be handled better.

Its easy to throw mud at the way things were done but what are the alternatives?

Giving them a cuppa and a biscuit while they got a foot rub and multiple choice questions that they didn't have to answer?

Using the softly, softly method certainly wouldn't have worked to clean up the corruption that did exist.

Are you inferring that there was little corruption, only a beat up by the press in conjunction with the integrety commission and the police commissioner to give the public the perception of widespread corruption?

Regardless, not too many innocent cops would have been killing themselves over the thought of what others thought.

If they did, today's polic force would all be committimg suicide, riddled with guilt over their part in the current new taxation system ( IE speed enforcement) and the consequential lack of respect that the general public has for them as a result of the part that they play in the collection of that revenue.

IMO this, along with campaigns like the "your in our sights" campaign which makes the police force out to be the predators and the general public their prey rather than simply public servants that are there to protect, has done a lot of harm to the public perception of the police.

[ltd]

Originally Posted by Craiginmackay

As I already stated, things may have been able to be handled better.

Its easy to throw mud at the way things were done but what are the alternatives?

Giving them a cuppa and a biscuit while they got a foot rub and multiple choice questions that they didn't have to answer?

Using the softly, softly method certainly wouldn't have worked to clean up the corruption that did exist.

Are you inferring that there was little corruption, only a beat up by the press in conjunction with the integrety commission and the police commissioner to give the public the perception of widespread corruption?

Regardless, not too many innocent cops would have been killing themselves over the thought of what others thought.

If they did, today's polic force would all be committimg suicide, riddled with guilt over their part in the current new taxation system ( IE speed enforcement) and the consequential lack of respect that the general public has for them as a result of the part that they play in the collection of that revenue.

IMO this, along with campaigns like the "your in our sights" campaign which makes the police force out to be the predators and the general public their prey rather than simply public servants that are there to protect, has done a lot of harm to the public perception of the police.

You've missed the point entirely, and you weren't here when it happened nor where you privvy to what went on behind the scenes.
No offence, but you're not at all qualified to comment, and I'd be in breach of this sites T&C to go further.

[XR6TCraig]

Originally Posted by ltd

You've missed the point entirely, and you weren't here when it happened nor where you privvy to what went on behind the scenes.
No offence, but you're not at all qualified to comment, and I'd be in breach of this sites T&C to go further.

No offence taken although I find your reply amusing. I was living in Sydney at the time. How much more 'here at the time' do you have to be, to be classed as 'here at the time'! I take it you mean that if I wasn't a cop, I just don't know what I am talking about because I only have a laymens idea of whats going on, not all of the inside information.

And I haven't missed the point at all, although it is easier to dissmiss me that way than to give me real answers I suppose.

You are telling me that the usual rights and priveledges that are afforded crimianls were not given to those questioned and that the whole enquiry ran quite different to normal legal proceedings, almost to the point of being a bit didgy. You failed to list alternatives which would have had the same effect though, IE cleaning up the corruption.

I also get that it is a small world and that people hold grudges and seek revenge, so the judge with a dodgy past got his.

I also get the strong impression that you are one of them, not a general member of the public, so you have this perception that you ( as a group not you personally) are above it all and shouldn't have been treated like that. After all, it was you guys running the show, not them?

What I don't get is why an innocent policeman would end their life because of the publics perception of them regarding corruption, but have no issues being a revenue collection agency. Explain that to me, as I obviously don't get it!
After all, ending your life in a circumstance such as this just leaves questions unanswered and ultimately, the associacion of guilt, not only to the public but also your friends, neighbours and family.

[ltd]

Originally Posted by Craiginmackay

No offence taken although I find your reply amusing. I was living in Sydney at the time. How much more 'here at the time' do you have to be, to be classed as 'here at the time'! I take it you mean that if I wasn't a cop, I just don't know what I am talking about because I only have a laymens idea of whats going on, not all of the inside information.

And I haven't missed the point at all, although it is easier to dissmiss me that way than to give me real answers I suppose.

You are telling me that the usual rights and priveledges that are afforded crimianls were not given to those questioned and that the whole enquiry ran quite different to normal legal proceedings, almost to the point of being a bit didgy. You failed to list alternatives which would have had the same effect though, IE cleaning up the corruption.

I also get that it is a small world and that people hold grudges and seek revenge, so the judge with a dodgy past got his.

I also get the strong impression that you are one of them, not a general member of the public, so you have this perception that you ( as a group not you personally) are above it all and shouldn't have been treated like that. After all, it was you guys running the show, not them?

What I don't get is why an innocent policeman would end their life because of the publics perception of them regarding corruption, but have no issues being a revenue collection agency. Explain that to me, as I obviously don't get it!
After all, ending your life in a circumstance such as this just leaves questions unanswered and ultimately, the associacion of guilt, not only to the public but also your friends, neighbours and family.

PM Sent

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by yanknbank

Came across this recently.

NSW use the 85th percentile methodology in it's "Speed Zoning Guidelines", along with other criteria ; The Hall Matrix, urban area criteria, noise and amenity etc.

I'd like to speed derestriction (//) in part, but the sign was removed from the AUS signs database in 2009. We'll see.