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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
The judges comments are relative to the importance of a valid warrant and that is relevant to the current charges!

Obviously. With a warrant or the relevant permission the recordings wouldn't be illegal. We already know that.

However, the reference in your post has nothing to do with prosecuting a NSW police officer under the Surveillance Devices Act.
 
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.
Allegations are one thing. What he's done and the legality of that, as it eventually goes down, is what I was talking about.
 
Just wanted to say to those that are saying that GJ's actions, if true and it's found he was in the wrong, will have a bearing on "the case" - what case?

There is no case as at this moment.

They haven't charged anyone, that will be up to the Coroner to recommend charges against any individual. I'm sure that she will take all legalities into account when she makes any such recommendation.
 
The judges comments are relative to the importance of a valid warrant and that is relevant to the current charges!
Which has nothing to do with my original point insofar as a police officer being prosecuted under the NSW Surveillance Devices Act being unprecedented as far as I (and @SouthAussie) can see. End of unless you can find the relevant precedent.
 
Last edited:
Just wanted to say to those that are saying that GJ's actions, if true and it's found he was in the wrong, will have a bearing on "the case" - what case?

There is no case as at this moment.

They haven't charged anyone, that will be up to the Coroner to recommend charges against any individual. I'm sure that she will take all legalities into account when she makes any such recommendation.

And even if a case does eventuate for little William (and I hope it does), I have already posted much information saying that illegal recordings may be allowed - when a judge considers the weight of the info in the recordings against the weight of not using the recordings in bringing justice for the victim (or words similar to that IIRC).

It is cited as a complex area of law.
 
Last edited:
And even if a case does eventuate, I have already posted much information saying that illegal recordings may be allowed - when a judge considers the weight of the info in the recordings against the weight of not using the recordings in bringing justice for the victim (or words similar to that IIRC).
If they're even relevant.
 
Oh - but didn't we want an Inquest on popular vote?
I don't know, did you? An inquest was always inevitable based upon WT's status as a child missing, presumed dead whilst in care. The timing of the inquest which was urged by way of petition by many of the public after it seemed there were no answers after a long period of time, have a right in law to a transparent system of law, may have hastened when the coronial inquest occurred. My understanding was that after that petition was received by the NSW govt, it was deemed inappropriate in relation to an ongoing investigation. I have no problem with anyone in the public requesting by petition what they want. If the law or charges are dropped or changed for individuals based upon their popularity, I have a problem with that. IMO
 
Which would be a darn shame if all this fuss and the charges are about nothing that is even relevant.

The PR shambles for the NSW Police will be even more heightened. imo
A lot of information would have been collected that turns out not to be relevant to a particular prosecution. Relevant to the investigation, yes. And there could be many uses for recordings other than to be produced as evidence in court.
 
I doubt that the charges will be dropped or changed due to the petition.
We already know that the top honchos spent weeks deliberating over whether to lay charges at all. I doubt that they would want to lose face after all their deliberations.

However, the petition to the DPP will show strongly the public outcry about this matter.
In much the same manner as the petition to the DPP about Borce Ristevski's weak sentence did.
The public have a loud voice when something upsets them enough.

I think the DPP could possibly recommend a slap on the wrist for Jubes IF anything becomes of the charges. If the judge doesn't dismiss the charges before any real proceedings.
 
I truly hope charges are not dropped based upon a popular vote. That's not the society I want to live in.
i don't want/think they will be dropped because I think jubes is a cool sexy guy. for the record.(even though he is damn sexy lol)

sometimes 'wobbly" attained info pushes a task force in the right direction.
happens every single day.

police oaths and discretion has to come into play here.

maybe the rules need to change openly.
police HAVE to record any and all verbal communication with public. all on record and every body knows it.

if the murking of affidavits comes in as fact my opinion WILL CHANGE.

moo
 
i don't want/think they will be dropped because I think jubes is a cool sexy guy. for the record.(even though he is damn sexy lol)

sometimes 'wobbly" attained info pushes a task force in the right direction.
happens every single day.

police oaths and discretion has to come into play here.

maybe the rules need to change openly.
police HAVE to record any and all verbal communication with public. all on record and every body knows it.

if the murking of affidavits comes in as fact my opinion WILL CHANGE.

moo
But if the officer is undercover, the people recorded won't know it. Would you require a warrant in that circumstance?
 
I doubt that the charges will be dropped or changed due to the petition.
We already know that the top honchos spent weeks deliberating over whether to lay charges at all. I doubt that they would want to lose face after all their deliberations.

However, the petition to the DPP will show strongly the public outcry about this matter.
In much the same manner as the petition to the DPP about Borce Ristevski's weak sentence did.
The public have a loud voice when something upsets them enough.

I think the DPP could possibly recommend a slap on the wrist for Jubes IF anything becomes of the charges. If the judge doesn't dismiss the charges before any real proceedings.
Hopefully the petition should go some small way to show a compassionate and dedicated detective, who has given 34 years of service to the NSW Police Force — 4 of those to William’s case — just how much he is appreciated and supported by the public.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
212
Guests online
291
Total visitors
503

Forum statistics

Threads
607,965
Messages
18,232,171
Members
234,260
Latest member
ghosts in my closet
Back
Top