HOW TO SACK QLD COPS- READ THIS INSP DOYLE QPS LNP CANDIDATE
HOW TO SACK QLD COPS- READ THIS INSP DOYLE QPS LNP CANDIDATE INS DOYLE
Note
: Inspector Doyle is mentioned. He retired soon after his son graduated from
the Townsville academy. See also previous post https://cynicismcentraltownsvilleaustralia.blogspot.com/2020/09/how-to-sack-qld-cops.html and Qld election arrest here https://cynicismcentraltownsvilleaustralia.blogspot.com/2020/11/bent-townsville-ex-cop-doyle-didnt-get.html
If links don’t appear to look active on this post, simply copy and paste them into your browser till I can work out what is wrong. That works. Follow this by putting this facebook link in your browser https://www.facebook.com/pat.coleman.90/posts/10158952012453447
RELEVENT QLD POLICE DISCIPLINARY SANCTIONS FOR ULTERIOR MOTIVE - Refer to my previous case studies on my blog here https://cynicismcentraltownsvilleaustralia.blogspot.com/2018/07/the-conduct-of-dodgy-townsville-ex.html
On police wearing right ring political symbols. Joining far right and money laundering political parties .
Cops like Inspector Doyle of the Townsville Police running for the seat of Mundingburra in the Qld State election. - have joined parties who have taken proceeds of crime donations from terrorism and organised crime money launderers Tabcorp and the CTH bank after they got done by the federal court . He joined and sought pre-selection while his mates were targeting anti Adani activists. Just so happens the Party he joined was being bribed liked the rest by Adani.
How can a commissioner cut through the political bullshit and make him pay back his wages since he joined the LNP? It lies in the “without favour or ill will” and incompetence and “wilful negligence” part of their legally enforceable oath. And it not being approved uniform . That they cant be trusted to act honestly for the purposes of s408C1(e ), (f) and (g) , and s92A of the code https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1899-009# and s15 of the CCC Act.
Disobedience of statute law and failure to perform a duty. The cops are taken to know the law under s22 of the Code https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1899-009#sch.1-sec.22 And s8 of The PSA Regulation says they have to familiarise themselves with it. https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/sl-2016-0044#sec.8
The following sections deal with complete disregard for integrity or incompetence or wilful negligence and against s7.1(b) of the PSA Act https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1990-004#pt.7-div.1 and 7.4(1) (c ) https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1990-004#sec.7.4 and s10.5(4) https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1990-004#sec.10.5
The Commissioner has power under Part 6 s 6(1 ) (a)(ii) and (iii) and (D) , s7.2, s7.4 of The Police service Administration Act (PSA) to stand cops down .
And people who work with them are under a duty to report misconduct under s7.4 of the PSA act https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1990-004 and s200 and 204 of the code but, if they aren’t stood down ,they are bound by their legally enforceable oath under3.3 and s6.4 of the PSA act. And Police Service Administration Regulation 2016 https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/sl-2016-0044
Then there is the duty to notify about misconduct under s37-40A of the Crime and Corruption Act https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-2001-069#ch.2-pt.3-div.3
If its dishonest or its a criminal offence the act , as apposed to those who administer it, says its corrupt in s13-19 of The CCC Act https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-2001-069#ch.1-pt.4-div.2
https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/sl-2016-0044#sec.5 Affirmation of office (1)For section 3.3 of the Act, the following affirmation is prescribed for a person to make and subscribe before beginning to perform duty as an officer—‘I, A.B., do solemnly, sincerely and truly affirm and declare that I will well and truly serve our Sovereign Lady Queen Elizabeth the Second and Her Heirs and Successors according to law in the office of constable or in such other capacity as I may be hereafter appointed, promoted, or may be reduced, without favour or affection, malice or ill-will, from this date and until I am legally discharged; that I will cause Her Majesty’s peace to be kept and preserved; that I will prevent to the best of my power all offences against the same; and that while I shall continue to be a member of the Queensland Police Service I will to the best of my skill and knowledge discharge all the duties legally imposed upon me faithfully and according to law.’.
( 2)However, subsection (3) applies if the person’s first performance of duty as an officer is to be as an officer of a rank (starting rank) other than constable.
(3)The affirmation prescribed for the person to make and subscribe before beginning to perform duty as an officer is the affirmation stated in subsection (1) subject to the word ‘constable’ being replaced by the word or words stating the rank that is the starting rank.
There is also s26 of The Qld Public service Act relating to acting honestly and with integrity and impartiality https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-2008-038
The commissioner can still take action against them as a former officers
under s7A.1, s7A.2, s7A.3 of Police Service Adaministration Act https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1990-004
WHY COPS WITH A GRUDGE ARE ACTING AGAINST THE INTERESTS OF THE STATE AND PEOPLE.
This can set off a chain of events that can costs the state a lot of money in : Exclusion of evidence through unlawful conduct/arrest. Unjustifiable use of police resources in arresting and detaining and prosecuting and or court and dropping charges. Investigating complaints , and covering them up. Subsequent civil actions and legal costs .
Their actions may be geared towards charging people with “contempt of cop” .And this is an unlawful ulterior motive see Trobridge v Hardy http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/HCA/1955/68.html and Bulsey & Anor v State of Queensland [2015] QCA 187 (6 October 2015) at par [4] http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/qld/QCA/2015/187.html
For an explanation of that read the 1997 CJC Report “reducing police civilian conflict” https://www.ccc.qld.gov.au/publications/reducing-police-civilian-conflict-analysis-assault-complaints-against-queensland
Protesting against police misconduct is not a public nuisance Courtney v Peacock [2008] QDC 87 http://archive.sclqld.org.au/qjudgment/2008/QDC08-087.pdf
If a bunch of cops with a political objective get together and start charging people that offend their world view , that is acting with an ulterior motive . Because they have to give the True grounds for arrest (s3ZD CTH Crimes Act http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdb/au/legis/cth/consol_act/ca191482/s3zd.html and Adams v Kennedy and ors (2000) 49 NSWLR 78 at par [17] applying Christie v Leachinsky (1947) AC 573 at 587-588). http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/nsw/NSWCA/2000/152.html
They have to have reasonable grounds under s365 of The PPRA https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-2000-005 ( Goldie v Commonwealth of Australia [2002] FCAFC 100 http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/cases/cth/FCAFC/2002/100.html ) , It actually has to be an offence. Those grounds must be grounded in objective fact.
For how this works scroll down on my blog post here with a real scenario https://cynicismcentraltownsvilleaustralia.blogspot.com/2019/09/trumped-up-election-charges-dismissed.html
An ulterior motive is not a reasonable ground. Racism is an ulterior motive and a detriment under s92A and s408C(1)of the code and s18(c ) of the CTH RDA http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/cth/consol_act/rda1975202/
And if its still unlawful or it’s a lie the person can resist , the cops are required to disobey their superiors giving unlawful commands under s31(1) of the code https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1899-009#sch.1-sec.31 and their only duty is to arrest cops trying to cause an assault on people Forbutt v Blake [1981] 51 FLR at 475 “I am unable to attribute an intention to the legislature to expose a person to such a penalty for disobeying a police order to cease lawful activity where the only relevant police duty is to prevent a breach of the peace by other citizens”
Osullivan v Lunnon [1986] 163 CLR at 554 “a police instruction to disperse,
is not of course any evidence that an offence was being committed” http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/HCA/1986/57.html
Cops can hassle far right people though, that’s because they are causing illegal detriments to people under s92A https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1899-009#sch.1-sec.92A ,s408C(1) (e ), (f) and (g)of the code and s18(c ) of the CTH Racial discrimination Act http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/cth/consol_act/rda1975202/ because of race and their protests can be declared a public nuisance under s6 of the Summary Offences Act http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdb/au/legis/qld/consol_act/soa2005189/s6.html
That is because motive as manifested towards others is relevant Watson v Trennery [1998] 122 NTR 1 https://supremecourt.nt.gov.au/_resources/documents/decisions/html?url=https%3A%2F%2Fsupremecourt.nt.gov.au%2F__data%2Fassets%2Frtf_file%2F0009%2F786267%2F1998-NTCA-22-Watson-v-Trenerry-Williams-v-Trenerry-26-May-1998-Angel%2C-Mildren-JJ-and-Gray-AJ.rtf
COPS AND DANGEROUS CONFLICTS OF INTERESTS
Police having dangerous associations is a matter that can lead to conflict
of interest . It’s a matter invoking many crimes, for instance failing to carry
out the duty of reporting , investigating and prosecuting crimes . The CCC has
done one of these and they cant take a step back . Joining the LNP and being a
candidate means you have evidence of crimes . Inspector Doyle has evidence of
crimes. I went into the Townsville Police HQ and handing over a paper detailing
crimes the cops could charge Lobbyists GovStrat , Honeycombes and Adani for
illegal donations and schemes to circumvent (Blog Link below) . Doyle cant say he didnt know about illegal donations , or that cops could use the code to target them. Adani, Govstrat and Honeycombes are illegal LNP donors . Scroll down on this post on my blog https://cynicismcentraltownsvilleaustralia.blogspot.com/2019/03/the-crimes-of-honeycombes-developer.html
He knew about that way before he sought preselection . And now he is still a cop running for the LNP , and if he has resigned , he can still be don’t for failing to perform a duty to investigate and charge under the code where the ECQ didn’t under the Electoral Act.
The CCC report on Pryczek https://www.ccc.qld.gov.au/sites/default/files/Docs/Publications/CCC/Prevention-in-Focus-The-potential-cost-of-failing-to-perform-duties-as-a-police-officer-2018.pdf
Follow the links on my blog post here https://cynicismcentraltownsvilleaustralia.blogspot.com/2019/02/adani-bribes-illegal-foreign-donations.html My Blog Post on police disciplinary sanctions https://cynicismcentraltownsvilleaustralia.blogspot.com/2020/09/how-to-sack-qld-cops.html
This part concerns the case of Lee v Crime and Corruption Commission; Crime and Corruption Commission v Lee [ 2020] QCA 201
https://archive.sclqld.org.au/qjudgment/2020/QCA20-201.pdf
A QPS Sgt was tasked with reviewing the watch house camera footage showing an officer assaulting a prisoner and reporting back on what he saw. He said he saw no assault which the film ACTUALLY showed.
THIS SHOWS THAT SINCE THE PALM ISLAND RISING , NOT MUCH HAS CHANGED see Wotten v Qld http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/FCA/2016/1457.html Scroll down to the law on perverting/fabrication and the most common code offences committed by cops in my experience.
Knowing about police misconduct and not reporting it indicates “a lack of integrity or attitudes incompatible with being a police officer” pars [34] a[40] “[39]………..Whilst Sergeant Lee’s corrupt conduct indicated a lack of integrity or attitudes incompatible with being a police officer, the lengthy period since 2008 demonstrated ongoing adherence by Sergeant Lee to appropriate ethical standards.
[40]Against that, the appeal tribunal acknowledged that corrupt conduct of this nature when made public will have an adverse effect on public trust in the police force generally. [41]The approach of the appeal tribunal was to balance these and other factors. It found that while there were several factors which pointed to the imposition of a more serious sanction, they were balanced by the mitigating factors. It specifically considered whether Sergeant Lee was presently fit for continued membership of the police service in considering whether or not dismissal should be ordered. Having weighed all those matters, the appeal tribunal was not satisfied that the objectives of s 219A of the CC Act would be served by dismissing Sergeant Lee from the police service and that, when it balanced the public interest considerations against Sergeant Lee’s circumstances, an order that Sergeant Lee be placed on probation met the necessary purposes.
[44] The CCC does not shrink from the contention that its challenge is based on the outcome of the disciplinary proceeding, not the process of reasoning of the appeal tribunal. No error that would amount to an error of law is identified in that reasoning. It is not suggested that any finding of fact was made without any evidence. It is not suggested that the appeal tribunal failed to take into account any relevant consideration or took into account any irrelevant consideration. The point is simply that ethical standards in the police service cannot be upheld unless it is made clear that anyone who is engaged in serious corrupt conduct, as a police officer, will be dismissed.
[46] It may be accepted that in many cases conduct of the kind engaged in by Sergeant Lee in the present case would result in an order of dismissal. But that is not because such an outcome is required in every case as a matter of law. It is because dismissal is within the range of orders or sanctions provided for and will be an appropriate order or sanction in many cases. But, in my view, it is a bridge too far to say that it is an order that must be made in all cases of corrupt conduct of the present kind or that the ethical standards in the police service cannot be upheld unless an order for dismissal is made in every such case”
This decision shows that the police disciplinary law is inadequate with regards to getting cops dismissed for covering up assaults and lying during investigations. That the proper course is to get on the streets and show, in fact what damage has been done to confidence in the police. Then go straight to the Cop prosecutors and tell them they will be guilty of refusal to perform a duty if they don’t use the ALL criminal code provisions relating to fabrication and perverting and obstructing justice, co-offenders and accessories after the fact and prosecute. And THEN seek dismissal. To apply THOSE laws as if they were average punters. That is within the power of police prosecutions and its required of them to act impartially under their legally enforceable oaths and s26 of The Qld Public Service Act https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-2008-038#sec.26
That adds another complaint layer to any CCC investigation and creates another paper trial you can get right to information on . And see my blog post here about how the disciplinary laws are SUPPOSED TO WORK to legally enforce oaths and impartiality https://cynicismcentraltownsvilleaustralia.blogspot.com/2020/09/how-to-sack-qld-cops.html
Keep in mind that the right and far right wish to dishonestly cause detriments to people and do acts preparatory to it and threaten people under the same laws that apply to cops below. Targeting the far right , is not going against free speech or impartiality as their motive as manifested to others is relevant .
The most common crimes that I have seen below, are hardly ever charged against cops. It starts with unlawful arrest, the assaults/excessive force and deprivation of liberty. The covering up/fabrication offences. The unlawful forging (writing lies) of police documents. Making false entries/ records relating to liberty, false reporting of matters relating to liberty. Perverting and fabrication and conspiracy and joint offending
The common law on perverting the course of justice :
R v McRoberts No.1 [2018] NTSC 41 (25 June 2018) http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/nt/NTSC/2018/41.html
The Queen v McRoberts (No 2) [2018] NTSC 42 (25 June 2018)
http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/nt/NTSC/2018/42.html
The common law cases on Jade
https://jade.io/search/perverting+the+course+of+justice
Carters Criminal Law of Qld 16th Ed on Perverting the course of justice and fabricating evidence.
“Perjury offences are serious offences which strike at the heart of the criminal justice system and are difficult to detect . Considerations of deterrence are important and offenders normally deserve custodial sentences “. (R v Morgan (1995) 82 ACRIMR 518” Extracted from Carters Criminal Law of Qld, 16th Edition , Authors ; MJ Shanahan Qld District Court Judge , P E Smith Barrister Qld ,S Ryan Barrister Qld , Reed International Book Trading as LexisNexis Butterworths Australia, 2007 , Printed Malaysia , p233 par [s124.15]. Page 231, Par [123.30]
.....The prosecution merely has to show that in the judicial proceeding in which the accused was a witness he or she wilfully (deliberately and not inadvertently or by mistake) made on oath a statement which he or she knew to be false or did not believe to be true .....R v Milward [1985] 1 QB 519; 1985 1 All ER 859 ; (1985) 80 Cr App R 280.... Page 235 Par [s126.20] Meaning of section The word “fabricates” is not necessarily used in the pejorative sense. The word may only mean “make up” or “get together” without any dishonest connotation. See R v Love (1983) 9 ACRIMR 1. The offence is complete even though the tribunal never sits; R v Vreones [1891] 1 QB 360 . Page 241, Par [s132.25]
....The course of justice is perverted or obstructed by impairing the capacity of a court to do justice. An act which has the tendency to effect this impairment is the actus reus of attempting to pervert the course of justice...... Par [s132.30]....
“It is well established at common law and under cognate statutory provisions that the offence of attempting or conspiring to pervert the course of justice can be committed when there are no curial proceedings on foot, see R v Murphy (1985) 158 CLR 596; 61 ALR 139; 59ALJR 682 ; 16 ACRIMR 2003 . It is enough that an act has a tendency to frustrate or deflect a prosecution which the accused contemplates may possibly be instituted even though the possibility has not been considered by police. See R v Rogerson (1992) 174 CLR 268 ; 107 ALR 225 ; 66 ALJR 500 , 60 ACRIMR 429 .......An act which has a tendency to deflect the police from prosecuting a criminal offence or instituting disciplinary proceedings before a judicial tribunal , or from adducing evidence of the true facts , is an act tending to pervert the course of justice , and if done with the intent to achieve that result , constitutes an attempt to pervert the course of justice ...... Page 247 , Par [s140.20] .........
“To prove this charge there has to be evidence that the accused has done enough for there to be a risk without further action by him that an injustice would occur, see R v Murray [1982] WLR 475 ; [1982] All ER 225; (1982) 75 Cr App R 58 .....It is sufficient if the evidence discloses a risk or possibility that injustice might result. See Foord v Whiddett (1985) 60 ALR 269; 16 ACRIMR 464. Laws that can plainly be seen to be broken by cops in most cases
THE QLD CRIMINAL CODE LINK https://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1899-009#
Chapter 2 Co-offending
s78 Interference with political rights.
S94 False certificates by public officers
S123 Perjury S127(1)(b) Fabricating evidence
s129 Damaging evidence with intent
s131 Conspiracy to bring false accusation
s132 Conspiring to defeat justice s140 Attempting to pervert justice
s193False verified statements
s194 False declarations
s195A Contradictory statements—false statements or declarations
s199 Resisting public officers
s200 Refusal by public officer to perform duty
s204 Disobedience to statute law
s245,s246 unlawful assault/arrest s283 Excessive force- s320A Torture
s290 Duty to do certain acts When a person undertakes to do any act the omission to do which is or may be dangerous to human life or health, it is the person’s duty to do that act: and the person is held to have caused any consequences which result to the life or health of any person by reason of any omission to perform that duty
. s328 Negligent acts causing harm
s335 Common assault
s355 Deprivation of liberty
s356 False certificates by officers charged with duties relating to liberty
s357 Concealment of matters affecting liberty
s399 Fraudulent concealment of particular documents
s480C(1) (d)-(g) Fraudulently/dishonestly causing an illegal detriment
s408D (1) and 1A Obtaining or dealing with identification information
s408E (1) Computer hacking and misuse
s359 Threats and s415 Extortion
s430 Fraudulent falsification of records
s488 Forgery and uttering
s499 Falsification of registers
s510 Instruments and materials for forgery
s535 and s539 Attempt to procure/commit crimes
s544 Accessories after the fact to offences
