Who police's the police.

Forums › Off topic › Who police's the police.

1 | 2 | 3

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2431521 3-Mar-2020 00:04

gzt:
In the other articles you linked it's clear that IPCA could not identify the person who administered the kick. Presumably the independent witness on the scene could not.

In this instance it looks like the kind of case only video can resolve, for the purpose of identification and prosecution only of one of several individuals on the scene.

Other than that you just have to hope in the case the alleged offender is a complete psycho that colleagues will talk and eventually dob in if that continues.

I'm not sure what the alternatives were in this case based on the evidence available to the IPCA.

You're not getting it -- to the point where I can't decide whether you're just being obtuse or worse. The point isn't that the cops can't identify who did the kicking and can't hold the person accountable. Sometimes that happens. It's the fact that the police continues to either deny that the cops kicked him or are continue to offer some "alternative fact" scenario where the injuries were caused by the other lawful aspects of the arrest, after the independent watchdog (which on any rule of law and credible argument ought to be the body with the final say) ruled that there were unlawful and unjustified kicking to the arrestee's head.

eracode

Smpl Mnmlst
8846 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#2431527 3-Mar-2020 03:55

Geektastic: [Tries to avoid being triggered by errant apostrophe’s]

+ [Tries to avoid being triggered by extremely long, rambling sentences the verbosity of which destroy the will to comprehend even after several readings.]

Sometimes I just sit and think. Other times I just sit.

gzt

17104 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2431931 3-Mar-2020 15:01

dejadeadnz: You're not getting it -- to the point where I can't decide whether you're just being obtuse or worse.

Neither really. I was addressing only the IPCA role and recommendations aspect.

The point isn't that the cops can't identify who did the kicking and can't hold the person accountable. Sometimes that happens. It's the fact that the police continues to either deny that the cops kicked him or are continue to offer some "alternative fact" scenario where the injuries were caused by the other lawful aspects of the arrest, after the independent watchdog (which on any rule of law and credible argument ought to be the body with the final say) ruled that there were unlawful and unjustified kicking to the arrestee's head.

Looking at the police media release you linked it appears to have a buck three ways:

a) might be kind of admiting we kicked him in the head because required during arrest
b) no we didnt
c) kind of admit it and took the recommendation on board and did some retraining

Like you I find the press release a bit disturbing.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2431939 3-Mar-2020 15:19

I have no idea about the IPCA and how it is supposed to work. However as a member of the public I should be able to have the upmost faith in our police force and the oversight of that force. If there is an issue on how the police and the IPCA are carrying out the process then the professionals involved should be making representation to government to have the process reviewed even if this needs to be made an election issue. I am not sure that Joe public has the information at hand and the access to make this happen. Those professionals that do come forth to push for a review should get the support of the public.

scuwp

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#2431951 3-Mar-2020 15:34

Having been in the service in a not to distant past life:

The IPCA have the luxury of months to investigate decisions that officers often have seconds to make. Unless you have lived it it's hard to explain
Everyone is an armchair expert, you are welcome to join up and experience the realities of Policing first hand and see how you manage it
The police are (IME) much harder on their own, they will bend over backwards to hang a cop in the interests of being seen to be transparent and fair
Nearly all cops are doing their best in some of the worst situations imaginable - not denying there are some bad eggs, and they usually don't last

Rarely are the IPCA findings disputed,and they resolve a lot more cases than makes the headlines.

Lazy is such an ugly word, I prefer to call it selective participation

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2431968 3-Mar-2020 16:10

I wouldn’t have minded joining up (although there’s exactly zero chance of my passing the medical so never a genuine opportunity for me) but I must say I doubt I have either the patience or the empathy to spend my nights acting as a social worker for drunks!

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2431970 3-Mar-2020 16:11

My earlier question stands, btw: who polices the IPCA?

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2431972 3-Mar-2020 16:16

Geektastic: My earlier question stands, btw: who polices the IPCA?

The Police buster busters ?

scuwp

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#2431977 3-Mar-2020 16:38

Geektastic: My earlier question stands, btw: who polices the IPCA?

Where would it end? Would we then require an agency to police the agency, that polices the agency, that polices the police?

In reality only the government. But then again the IPCA don't really Police the Police. The IPCA are only an advisory body and do not have any prosecution powers as such.

We don't have an 'internal affairs' like the american movies. We should be proud that we don't really need that level of scrutiny.

Lazy is such an ugly word, I prefer to call it selective participation

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2431978 3-Mar-2020 16:40

I am probably wrong but wouldn't parliament and the courts be responsible for the final oversight.

JaseNZ

2576 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#2431979 3-Mar-2020 16:43

Yup all good points, I just did not realise the IPCA had zero power and is really only there in an advisory role.

So there is there nothing in the police itself like a division that just deals with any possible corrupt cops, I guess not it is really just self policed.

Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding : Ice cream man , Ice cream man

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2431986 3-Mar-2020 16:56

JaseNZ:

Yup all good points, I just did not realise the IPCA had zero power and is really only there in an advisory role.

So there is there nothing in the police itself like a division that just deals with any possible corrupt cops, I guess not it is really just self policed.

Like all government agencies they are accountable to the crown via the minister in charge.

JaseNZ

2576 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#2432017 3-Mar-2020 18:26

MikeB4:

Like all government agencies they are accountable to the crown via the minister in charge.

The minister has zero power though doesn't he ?? , By that he has no police powers does he ??.

I don't think he would have the power to say I want that specific policeman/woman investigated that would have to fall to the superintendent in that region ??

Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding : Ice cream man , Ice cream man

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2432028 3-Mar-2020 18:51

JaseNZ:

The minister has zero power though doesn't he ?? , By that he has no police powers does he ??.

I don't think he would have the power to say I want that specific policeman/woman investigated that would have to fall to the superintendent in that region ??

The Commissioner of Police is accountable to the minister and cabinet.

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2432052 3-Mar-2020 20:03

scuwp:

Having been in the service in a not to distant past life:

The IPCA have the luxury of months to investigate decisions that officers often have seconds to make. Unless you have lived it it's hard to explain

People constantly prattle on with this point but it's irrelevant. In deciding whether the conduct involved is defensible, the IPCA investigators explicitly take into account the urgency and nature of the situation. Whether the force used was reasonable is determined by whether a postulated objective, intelligent person who is generally aware of society's expectations and the training of the cops, assessing based on the facts as the cops involved knew at the time, would consider the force used to be proportionate to the threat posed by the arrestee. This actually mirrors exactly the self-defence/defence of other provision in the Crimes Act. Unless you have a problem with the police being made to follow the laws of the land, it's simply implausible and ignorant to the extreme to be taking the pot shot that you did.

1 | 2 | 3