Who police's the police.

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

1 | 2 | 3

Technofreak

6530 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#2432074 3-Mar-2020 20:37

dejadeadnz:

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.

Hmmm.

I thought that was a perfectly reasonable statement for anyone to make. I really struggle to see how you could call it a 'pot shot'. It was just stating the obvious.

I work in an industry where if there is a incident or accident a similar thing applies. The investigators have the benefit of time to analyse what happened and determine if anyone stuffed up. In extreme cases the main protagonists are no longer with us to tell their versions of the events nor are they able to defend their actions.

Dynamic situations call for an immediate action. Not always is the best course of action taken in the heat of the moment, it may take too long to think of or implement. In hind sight if given a second chance at the same situation they may choose another option.

I struggle to see what your issue is.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2432078 3-Mar-2020 20:45

The point clearly wasn't just a neutral description that the IPCA gets to investigate after the incident. The "Unless you have lived it it's hard to explain" line gives it away. Rather, it's a none-too-subtle potshot alleging some kind of armchair judging on the part of the IPCA and, frankly, that's ironic in light of the fact that most IPCA investigators are ex-police.

Technofreak

6530 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#2432082 3-Mar-2020 20:56

dejadeadnz:

The point clearly wasn't just a neutral description that the IPCA gets to investigate after the incident. The "Unless you have lived it it's hard to explain" line gives it away. Rather, it's a none-too-subtle potshot alleging some kind of armchair judging on the part of the IPCA and, frankly, that's ironic in light of the fact that most IPCA investigators are ex-police.

I never got that inference.

SCUWP would know only too well how the IPCA is staffed for him to try and aim a comment like that at the IPCA. I think that comment was aimed at anyone who has never worked in that situation.

I think you're joining the wrong dots.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

scuwp

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#2432141 3-Mar-2020 21:34

Wow, didn't see that tangent coming from my comments! Not a potshot at the IPCA, like Technofreak said, reading far to much into my comments. Besides the media and public have the armchair full of experts already!

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

weasel13

38 posts

Geek

#2432841 4-Mar-2020 22:33

dejadeadnz:

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.

The IPCA are generally made up of lawyers, therefore lacking in common sense. You being an ex defence lawyer, I trust your opinion even less.

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2432848 4-Mar-2020 22:52

scuwp:

Wow, didn't see that tangent coming from my comments! Not a potshot at the IPCA, like Technofreak said, reading far to much into my comments. Besides the media and public have the armchair full of experts already!

On the extreme end of the scale, imagine an armed officer is a dangerous situation having possibly LESS than seconds in which to decide whether to employ lethal force or not being investigated later at leisure with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight. I imagined that was more what you were suggesting.

Technofreak

6530 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#2432911 5-Mar-2020 08:30

So far as the IPCA is concerned I believe it should be made up of experts in policing, i.e. actual police officers.

While the IPCA isn't actually involved in a trial as such they are playing the role of adjudicator or jury.

In our legal system when it comes to a trial the jury is made up of peers. (people equal to the defendant). People who with no expertise in that field will have no idea whether the practices used were in compliance with normal practice. People from within a profession tend to apply a high standard when judging others in that profession.

The IPCA should be (and it may well be) like the Medical Council who investigate and discipline doctors.

While from the outside it may look like the poacher being the gamekeeper I think the IPCA along with public and political influences do a pretty good job in policing the police. The model of the IPCA is used in other areas quite successfully.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

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.

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2433365 5-Mar-2020 20:24

weasel13:

The IPCA are generally made up of lawyers, therefore lacking in common sense. You being an ex defence lawyer, I trust your opinion even less.

If you're going to launch into ad hominem attacks, at least try harder. The IPCA most assuredly aren't made up generally of lawyers. And you know what's even more funny? I spent the least amount of my time in criminal practice working in the defence bar and generally aren't a big fan of the Criminal Bar Association but don't let facts get in your way.

If you'd bothered to read their latest annual report, you'd see the following words signed off by the Chair:

The Authority’s investigations are undertaken by teams of staff with a variety of experience. These include some staff with extensive policing experience, either in New Zealand or in other Commonwealth countries, and others with significant legal, investigative or complaints management experience. Investigations are subject to management oversight and review and any report issued publicly is reviewed and signed by the Chair of the Authority. The Chair, who must be a Judge or a retired Judge, is ultimately responsible for all findings and recommendations.

Ouch. Facts hurt.

Technofreak

6530 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#2433370 5-Mar-2020 20:44

scuwp:

Wow, didn't see that tangent coming from my comments! Not a potshot at the IPCA, like Technofreak said, reading far to much into my comments. Besides the media and public have the armchair full of experts already!

I really though you might have got an apology, obviously not. A little humility goes a long way.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2433388 5-Mar-2020 21:09

I see nothing to apologise for. Regardless of the intent (and I still read it differently) the fundamental messaging behind the OP's post is obnoxious. The notion that only experts or people who've done exactly the very thing that the OP has done is fit to judge the behaviour of the cops is incompatible with fundamental notions of the rule of law (i.e. that the police enforce the law with the consent and the authority of the citizenry), the very words of domestic legislation (e.g. the Crimes Act provisions governing use of force to defend oneself and others and its requirement that the force used must be objectively reasonable. The courts have clearly pronounced that the objective test is not just based on what a cop will do), and international law.

And for another laugh:

So far as the IPCA is concerned I believe it should be made up of experts in policing, i.e. actual police officers.

You then go on to infer that this model of only (you do understand the difference between "i.e" and "e.g.", right?) having only people within the relevant field being able to render professional disciplinary verdicts is what is practiced by the Medical Council, i.e. inferring that the MC is made up only of doctors. If you bother to read the "About Us" page on the MC's website, you'll realise that its 12 Council members are made up of both doctors and laypeople. A similar system applies in the composition of the Lawyers and Conveyancers Disciplinary Tribunal. I can go on but it's not necessary.

Really, what you're doing is the equivalent of a flat-earther marching into a conference of astrophysicists demanding to be listened to. A little humility does indeed go a long way.

Technofreak

6530 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#2433394 5-Mar-2020 21:30

Oh Great One I have been chastised by someone so much more smarter than I.

I will try to remember in the future to never question your wisdom.

P.S.

Just before I leave this subject for today, you might like to count the number of plus ones in posts on this thread where your point of view has been challenged and compare this to the number of plus ones for your posts on this thread. That might give you an indication as to how other posters have reacted to your point of view and the fact you just might have got the wrong end of the stick on what some people have posted.

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#2433399 5-Mar-2020 21:36

Oh god, we are now having an internet popularity contest to determine what fundamental facts are? How old are you? What story about professional regulatory systems will you make up next?

Edit: typo

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79250 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#2433481 6-Mar-2020 07:49

You are all very funny. Locked.

1 | 2 | 3