Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #41

[JLZ]

It is a sad statement for our laws that our officers are not more protected and given more tools to catch the uncooperative perps.
Just as it is a sad statement that our courts let crims go with a slap on the wrist, when they have completely devastated someone else's life.

Speaking of tools to assist and a little O/T , but as an example..... I saw yesterday that, in Japan, officers fire paintballs at a fleeing perp's car, bright orange paint that is hard to remove. They do this so the perp cant hide away very well and people will know they are a perp.
No-one can sue them for damaging the car's paintwork. It is part of their protection and part of doing their job.

Eh, I like that. A bit tough if they hit the wrong car, but better than getting shot.

 

[Bohemian]

Jubes not only has supporters on WS:

‘Almost 4,000 people have signed a petition calling for charges against a high-profile NSW homicide detective to be dropped.’

https://7news.com.au/news/nsw-polic...lliam-tyrrell-detective-gary-jubelin-c-180125

 

[k-mac]

Jubes not only has supporters on WS:

‘Almost 4,000 people have signed a petition calling for charges against a high-profile NSW homicide detective to be dropped.’

https://7news.com.au/news/nsw-polic...lliam-tyrrell-detective-gary-jubelin-c-180125

i seriously think they will be dropped.
the ramifications to policing would be enormous.

MOO

 

[SouthAussie]

i seriously think they will be dropped.
the ramifications to policing would be enormous.

MOO

As well, I think Jubes barrister is going to have lots of room for manouevre/appeal if it ever came time to deliver any punishment for this offence. What precedence is there? I can't find one. There may be something out there but I am unable to find anything about a police officer being charged/punished by the courts for illegal recording.

 

[SouthAussie]

Jubes not only has supporters on WS:

‘Almost 4,000 people have signed a petition calling for charges against a high-profile NSW homicide detective to be dropped.’

https://7news.com.au/news/nsw-polic...lliam-tyrrell-detective-gary-jubelin-c-180125

Your linked article even provides the link to the petition.

Guessing that much of the media are behind Jubes as well, from what I have been able to see so far.

With the deputy editor of the Sunday Telegraph also publishing her strong opinion piece this morning on the 'triviality of the charges', and how the police are 'going public with their petty infighting again', and how they 'act like private school girls in a Year 12 common room', and how they should just 'get on with the job of finding William, he is still missing' (paraphrasing).
We’re for Sydney | Daily Telegraph

 

[Bohemian]

i seriously think they will be dropped.
the ramifications to policing would be enormous.

MOO

I hope so, k-mac.

As @SouthAussie has stated many times, I have searched and searched and can’t seem to find one instance where a police officer has been prosecuted by the DPP under the Surveillance Devices Act. As far as I can see, this case is unprecedented in NSW.

 

[Bohemian]

Your article even provides the link to the petition.

Guessing that much of the media are behind Jubes as well, from what I have been able to see so far.

With the deputy editor of the Sunday Telegraph also publishing her strong opinion piece this morning on the 'triviality of the charges', and how the police are 'going public with their petty infighting again', and how they 'act like private school girls in a Year 12 common room', and how they should just 'get on with the job of finding William, he is still missing' (paraphrasing).
We’re for Sydney | Daily Telegraph

He certainly has a lot of people who have his back.

 

[SouthAussie]

He certainly has a lot of people who have his back.

What a PR nightmare for the NSW police.

 

[louisepiglet]

I agree, it's exactly the same, and you agree BS was crucified for years? Or to put it another way, many want innocence until proven guilty to apply to GJ when it was not extended to POI who has not been charged for anything in WT's case and actuually appears to have had other charges brought against him dealt with so he is walking around as a free man, through the media for years. Most posters on here display hypocrisy about players in this case, myself included. It's human. Dare I say that particularly in relation to the example you have given of GJ and BS that it might even be karmic? If a police person has resort to illegal activity to try to secure a conviction then surely the conviction will always be in doubt and may even point to being incompetence in their profession if found guilty?IMO

Great post Froggy.

 

[papertrail]

I hope so, k-mac.

As @SouthAussie has stated many times, I have searched and searched and can’t seem to find one instance where a police officer has been prosecuted by the DPP under the Surveillance Devices Act. As far as I can see, this case is unprecedented in NSW.

This link contains details of a 2015 NSW case snd the Judge's decesiin against the NSW Police was scathing. Shows just how serious the charges are!
Surveillance Devices Act 2007 (NSW) - Wikipedia

Then find your way to the heading 'Admissibility of evidence obtained by surveillance device'....

In R v Simmons (No 2) [2015] NSWCCA 143 members of the NSW police were undertaking a complex undercover sting operation. They had obtained surveillance device warrants on a number of occasions to record conversations they had with a man suspected of murder. However, two of the warrants had expired by a number days and police had failed to apply to have the warrants renewed. The Prosecutor submitted that it was merely an oversight and the unlawfulness or contravention of the Act was not serious. Justice Hamill disagreed saying at [138]:

“Contrary to the submission of the Crown, I find that the impropriety is quite grave: s 138(3)(d). The rights to silence and to privacy are important parts of a functioning democracy and free and civilised society. Where safeguards such as the Surveillance Devices Act are enacted, law enforcement officers must be fastidious in ensuring that they are complied with.”[33]

 

[papertrail]

Jubes not only has supporters on WS:

‘Almost 4,000 people have signed a petition calling for charges against a high-profile NSW homicide detective to be dropped.’

https://7news.com.au/news/nsw-polic...lliam-tyrrell-detective-gary-jubelin-c-180125

I doubt that a petition will get anywhere.

 

[papertrail]

It's a bit like people defending BS for his historical charges prior to any court hearing. Many were pleading "Innocent until proven Guilty". Some of those same people are now crucifying GJ even though the same should apply - "Innocent until proven Guilty". And I add for much less horrific actions than what BS was charged for.

People will have differences, but it amazes me that if you have a moral reason for stating innocence of some, how those morals and opinions can change because of personal likes or dislikes - or even personal history and agenda's.

All my own opinion.

Crucifying....really?

 

[Bohemian]

What a PR nightmare for the NSW police.

It’s looking very much like it. I can only imagine it’s been equally a nightmare for the families of the homicide victims whose cases he was working on.

 

[papertrail]

No, I think I'm more in alignment with Frogwell on the hypothetical. Police officers need to work within the law regardless of feelings of frustration. But I hope it won't come to that, or if it does, that the breach was minor and unintentional.

The alleged breach is obviously not considered minor as there are allegations that Jubelin also encouraged more junior officers to take same actions as the allegations against him. And then the media also raised the allegations of falsifying affidavits. Not currently charged but I suspect there may be charges following to support those allegations.

One bad apple in a bowl corrupts all surrounding apples. I am not saying Jubelin is a bad apple I am saying actions according to current charges are bad.

 

[Bohemian]

This link contains details of a 2015 NSW case snd the Judge's decesiin against the NSW Police was scathing. Shows just how serious the charges are!
Surveillance Devices Act 2007 (NSW) - Wikipedia

Then find your way to the heading 'Admissibility of evidence obtained by surveillance device'....

In R v Simmons (No 2) [2015] NSWCCA 143 members of the NSW police were undertaking a complex undercover sting operation. They had obtained surveillance device warrants on a number of occasions to record conversations they had with a man suspected of murder. However, two of the warrants had expired by a number days and police had failed to apply to have the warrants renewed. The Prosecutor submitted that it was merely an oversight and the unlawfulness or contravention of the Act was not serious. Justice Hamill disagreed saying at [138]:

“Contrary to the submission of the Crown, I find that the impropriety is quite grave: s 138(3)(d). The rights to silence and to privacy are important parts of a functioning democracy and free and civilised society. Where safeguards such as the Surveillance Devices Act are enacted, law enforcement officers must be fastidious in ensuring that they are complied with.”[33]

That relates to admissibility of evidence in a murder trial, not to a NSW police officer being prosecuted under the Surveillance Devices Act.

 

[papertrail]

It’s looking very much like it. I can only imagine it’s been equally a nightmare for the families of the homicide victims whose cases he was working on.

A successful prosecution should NEVER depend on one person. Rosann Taskforce is Team. And the old adage of no I in Team is the perfect fit for this investigation.

To consider the be all and end all of a successful prosecution is dependant on one person ie Jubelin is foolhardy imo.

 

[sleepinoz]

Crucifying....really?

Yup

 

[papertrail]

That relates to admissibility of evidence in a murder trial, not to a NSW police officer being prosecuted under the Surveillance Devices Act.

The judges comments are relative to the importance of a valid warrant and that is relevant to the current charges!

 

[purpleandgreen]

Just reminiscing here. My father was one of the kindest, best men I ever knew and he had a wonderful compassionate saying: 'Never kick a man when he's down.' And he lived by it and was revered by all who knew him. IMO

 

[papertrail]

Oh you added some extra points whilst I was responding.

Karmic? why would you say that? Are you saying that GJ deserves these charges for the way BS was treated? That's a bit over the top IMO. GJ wasn't on the case when BS properties were searched, background investigation brought up the historical charges. Now if he wasn't charged for the historical charges would people be saying that it's GJ's fault that he wasn't charged? Hypocrisy at it's best.

GJ is not the only person on the Task Force, I'm sure that he is not the one that personally goes around and collects evidence. Many officers would be doing most of the leg work.

Incompetent in their profession if found guilty? Exactly what I'm talking about in my original post.

Jubelin had worked on the historic charges way back when they were initially raised before they were historic..