|
>> Firstly,your comments about Hurley misrepresent the facts. >> According to reports of peers Hurley did volunteer to work in Aboriginal
>> communities and was keen to assist the aboriginal community.
>Um .. which is why I wrote >Senior Sergent Chris Hurley was unlucky enough to either volunteer or be volunteered for the task, >In what way have I misreprented facts here? I took the view that you weren't referring to volunteering to help aboriginal people because the rest of the sentence was "and he seems to have approached his job with a little too much zeal". Perhaps you can explain what you meant. To me it read like he wasn't community spirited but had volunteered so he can beat up on aboriginal people. This seemed to misrepresent the peer reports of his attitude toward aboriginal people. (And an aboriginal activist's comments early on to the effect that he was the exception to racist cops) >> >> "Cameron Doomadgee was arrested and died in custody after a scuffle with the
>> >> Senior Sergent." >> This does not automatically mean that Doomadgee was murdered. The facts
>> provide another explanation.
>I don't recall writing that it did. Could you indicate where I wrote that Doomadgee was murdered? Again it was that "seems to have approached his job with a little too much zeal" comment that you will now no doubt explain. It makes it sound like Hurley beat up Mulrunji and caused his death. So what did you mean? Actually I don't care what you meant as long as you now understand why I took it that way. Whether or not you explain I am relieved to read that you didn't get suckered by the media and don't share the views of the socialist groups. >> >> "And any decision about what do do with Sergent Hurley was also going to be
>> >> made on political grounds. Like the decision to not charge Sergent Hurley..." >> Why? It fits the facts and was made by an independent department based on
>> the advice of a retired judge. There is no indication it is political.
Ha ha! An 'independent department'? You mean an 'independent department' appointed by the government of the day? Perhaps...or perhaps not. Wasn't Shanahan (a judge?)considered for the review but rejected because he had been involved in the Qld Director's appointment? If so is it as simple as an appointment by the government of the day? "This is like describing the ABC as unbiased." Something I would never do. >> >> "It's difficult not to sympathize with someone who has so obviously been
>> >> charged due to political reasons, but he was a policeman, and that's the system
>> >> he agreed to when he signed up." >> He couldn't have known there would be this type of political interference in
>> the judicial process. It is unprecedented. >Your argument is weird. First you claim no political interference, and then you claim political interference on an 'unprecedented' scale. The political interference was when Beattie hired Jessie Street's son to review the DPP decision. (The review was the interference regardless of who did it. Being the son of an aboriginal activist I just thought I'd throw in as it didn't get much mention in the media.) >"And what do you mean 'unprecedented'? You mean that governments have never interfered in judicial issues before? Ha ha!" No. I mean that the government has never had a DPP decision reviewed in this way before. Therefore it was a left field thing for Hurley. >> >> "There will be a trial, and there will be process ('due process' is what
>> >> they like to call it in some circles)." >> Due process would have been the normal process followed which would mean the
>> DPP decision would have been the end of the line. That is the way it is with
>> everyone else. >Who defines what 'due process' is? The government of the day. Paperwork was done, committees were formed, opinions documented .. due process was done. There is a presumption of innocence until proven guilty. This is relevant at two levels. First people who don't have a case against them don't face the stigma and stress of a major criminal trial. Secondly if there is sufficient evidence for a trial the prosecution has to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Here the normal umpire made a call on the first step and it was bypassed by Beattie. >> >> "Anyone who voluntarily becomes a police officer is giving up their own
>> >> morality and replacing it with the morality of the law. The morality of the
>> >> government. The morality of the masses. The morality of the mob." >> That is a bit lateral don't you reckon. It is a bit of a stretch as an
>> excuse for Hurley to be hung out and dried. >Where did I pose this as an excuse? I merely said that Hurley decided to swim with sharks and got bitten. You are excusing/downplaying the gross injustice that Beattie has perpetuated with this mob rule approach by blaming the victim. Beattie is the problem not Hurley. >> >> "Morality and justice are replaced by 'due process'." >> But due process wasn't followed. There was political interference.
>Wrong. There was both due process and political interference. The political interference derailed the due process. The Socialist organisation protests and media campaign got their way. >> Again in spite of your lateral stretch he may have signed up for due process
>> not a breach of due process. It was unprecedented until it happened to him.
>Ha ha. You have only just noticed that government officials lie, cheat and manipulate situations to achieve a desired outcome? How old are you? This type of breach is unprecedented. >For that matter how old is Hurley? Younger than me. I think he is 36 but I'm sure he is aging rapidly. >> Secondly news reports have been a bit misleading. It is often quoted that: >> "In her detailed 35-page report, Clements found that Hurley hit Mulrunji
>> whilst he was on the floor a number of times. An Aboriginal witness saw Hurley
>> bending over the prostrate Mulrunji, with Hurleys elbow going up and down three
>> times, and Hurley saying, Have you had enough, Mr Doomadgee? Do you want more,
>> Mr Doomadgee? Do you want more?... " >> This fails to mention that the witness said that the punches were to the
>> head and were followed by kicks. Medical evidence ruled out kicks. This left
>> the punches as a possibility. The coroner said it was open to her to rule that
>> the punches were to the body to explain the fatal liver injury because she
>> believed that the witness didn't have a good view. >Really? You mean that there is bias in media reporting? SOMEONE ALERT THE MEDIA! Oh .. um. At least there's always that bastion of fairness and balance: the ABC's Media Watch. Hang on .. you mean that Media Watch wasn't interested in presenting evidence which might have been construed as 'anti-Aboriginal'? I'm shocked! Shocked! I mention it because I suspect many people don't know that. Media give people the feeling they are fully informed when they know half the story. "Details about punches, kicks and weights can be presented in court as part of the 'due process' - the process that Hurley signed up to. Claims about who was biased, who was not biased, or who was the most suitable Elite to hear the claims can also be brought up in court." Easy to say but how would you like to be on trial for manslaughter suspended from work for the next year. It is a bitch of a thing to happen when the DPP decided there wasn't sufficient evidence and if the people hadn't slotted into the specific categories they did and the media hadn't misrepresented the facts it never would have gone to trial. Thanks Strawman
| 
