Cop in court for throwing object at rider

Just Rick · **Reply #30: September 11, 2016, 16:58:12**

Sorry,but all I can say is they BOTH broke the law,more so the bike rider by this evidence,but having said that,I would not not condem the Cop on it,having been in the situation a while back of being a victim of dash cam evidence,as most dashcam evidence NEVER tells the whole story,I would strongly suspect if there had been a dashcam video from the other end It would probably lead to the bike rider incarcerated for quite some time,but although I can see both side,I have to support rusty here,two wrongs don't make a right,or as confusious said two wongs don't make a white

they both should be charged and dealt with appropriately JMO

CraigB · **Reply #31: September 11, 2016, 17:06:39**

I don't think charging the officer is warranted TBH and more so that'd just be a waste of taxpayer money, a talking to from his senior should be all that is called for there imo.

Doggie 1 · **Reply #32: September 11, 2016, 19:17:23**

Quote from: rustynutz on September 11, 2016, 16:26:21

Now to Dave...

How about dismounting from that high horse of yours, Dave!

Geez, and people accuse me of ramming my opinions down peoples throats...

Have a good night...

You do.
You too.
Over and out.

Dazzler · **Reply #33: September 11, 2016, 23:03:06**

Funnily enough in the same situation (right or wrong) I reckon I would have instinctively thrown the book at him too.

I know which one should have the book thrown at him in court (and it isn't the cop)

beerman · **Reply #34: September 11, 2016, 23:46:46**

He was just doing what the public wants. How many time have you heard the public or the media tell police to 'throw the book at him'....

Dazzler · **Reply #35: September 12, 2016, 00:03:51**

Quote from: beerman on September 11, 2016, 23:46:46

He was just doing what the public wants. How many time have you heard the public or the media tell police to 'throw the book at him'....

Often in past tense too.. "he should have thrown the book at them" When he does he gets in trouble!

John B · **Reply #36: September 12, 2016, 07:27:01**

Just to lighten it up a bit, this thread talking about things being thrown, reminded of the film Arthur. If you have seen the film you would have remembered when he was on a boat and a bit under the influence he was invited to join in on the clay pigeon shooting and it went like this . Arthur fires his rifle and then shouts " pull," the clay pigeon fly's out and Arthur shouts " hit the bullet hit the bullet "

Perhaps the policeman threw his book and said "hit the book hit the book"

FatBoy · **Reply #37: September 12, 2016, 09:02:17**

To me, the ends don't justify the means. You can't stop people from breaking the law by breaking the law yourself.

Are Police held to a higher standard than the normal public? To me, yes, and rightly so. They are there to uphold the law, not make the law.

It was the same in the military. We were expected to behave differently to people off the street, because that is what was expected. If not, then it would be open slather killing of combatants and non-combatants. I've even heard people say that in the Navy we should have shot refugees arriving by boats as that would "stop them coming". Hell, 1200 died at sea trying to get here, it was a dangerous trip, and still they chose to make the journey! Breaking the law (shooting the refugees) to stop them breaking the law (arriving illegally) to me did not make sense, nor would I condone that type of behaviour.

rustynutz · **Reply #38: September 12, 2016, 10:49:28**

Nicely put, Jamie...

rustynutz · **Reply #39: September 14, 2016, 02:01:37**

Case adjourned on cop throwing object at rider
BY MARK HINCHLIFFE
13 SEP, 2016

The case of NSW Senior Constable Brett Rossiter, charged with allegedly throwing “an object” at a motorcycle rider, has been adjourned to October 25, 2016.

The incident occurred while the specialist command Senior Constable was performing random breath tests on Hannahs Road at Narwee, in Sydney, on Friday, November 6, 2015.

It will be alleged the officer threw an object at the rider who did not stop at the RBT location. Although it cannot be seen in the video, it is alleged the rider crashed and suffer minor injuries.

The officer was charged with ‘intentionally throw object at vehicle / vessel – risk safety’ under the NSW Crimes Act 1900 – Sect 49A which carries a maximum penalty of five years’ jail.

In a recent incident where North Queensland Cowboys players threw eggs at vehicles, two of the offenders received $2500 fines.

This is the second time the case has been adjourned.

Source:

Case adjourned on cop throwing object at rider - Motorbike Writer

Doggie 1 · **Reply #40: September 19, 2016, 10:26:53**

I wish to apologise for the way in which I responded to this thread.
I have taken a few very well-needed days away from the forum to consider my position.
I have consulted with one other person (you know who you are) and I sincerely thank you for your support.

I do not resile from my opinion or my position on this issue, however, I (eventually) responded to the initial posting against my better judgement and after promising myself that I would not be drawn into the debate.
I was wrong to do so and I acknowledge that.
This forum is supposed to be (and usually is) a pleasant place for all to be and as a moderator I, more than anyone, should be actively promoting that by my actions. By responding to this thread, I believe I acted in a way that does not support the forum's position.
Therefore, I apologise to the general forum membership and I will attempt to move on.
As a result, I may not be on the forum quite so much in the near future.
However, I will carefully consider my responses to any new threads with a view to avoiding inflaming the situation relating to the postings by some forum members.
Thank you.

Surferdude · **Reply #41: September 19, 2016, 12:05:48**

Just reread the whole thing and can't see any need for an apology.
In my opinion, you have taken the time to research the background and explain it in detail.
You responded to a post, expressed your opinion, then came back with more information. You didn't belabour the point or go back over the same ground.
I for one would seriously miss your ongoing, regular contributions to this forum.

asathorny · **Reply #42: September 19, 2016, 12:46:04**

Quote from: Surferdude on September 19, 2016, 12:05:48

Just reread the whole thing and can't see any need for an apology.
In my opinion, you have taken the time to research the background and explain it in detail.
You responded to a post, expressed your opinion, then came back with more information. You didn't belabour the point or go back over the same ground.
I for one would seriously miss your ongoing, regular contributions to this forum.

CraigB · **Reply #43: September 19, 2016, 12:55:48**

The Gonz · **Reply #44: September 19, 2016, 14:08:00**

Stop going all PC on me, Dave. You're starting to worry me. Have you recently given up bacon?

rustynutz · **Reply #45: October 26, 2016, 03:22:15**

Cop faces hearing over throwing object at rider
26TH OCTOBER, 2016
BY MARK HINCHLIFFE

Senior Constable Rossiter has appeared in two Sydney courts on three separate occasions for mention on the charge of “intentionally throw object at vehicle / vessel – risk safety”.

The charge has a maximum penalty of imprisonment for five years under the NSW Crimes Act.

The officer appeared again yesterday (October 25) when the matter was referred to the same court on June 6 2017 for a hearing.

It will be alleged the officer was seen throwing an object at the rider, causing him to crash and suffer minor injuries. The video does not show any signs of a crash.

No more details are available and the matter cannot be discussed as it is before the courts, but we will follow up next year.

Source:

Cop faces hearing over throwing object at rider - Motorbike Writer

rustynutz · **Reply #46: October 26, 2016, 03:31:47**

June 6, 2017???

What's the bet this will just fade away never to be heard of again...

Dazzler · **Reply #47: October 26, 2016, 07:35:46**

Quote from: rustynutz on October 26, 2016, 03:31:47

June 6, 2017???

What's the bet this will just fade away never to be heard of again...

I hope so....

asathorny · **Reply #48: October 26, 2016, 08:09:15**

Quote from: Dazzler on October 26, 2016, 07:35:46

Quote from: rustynutz on October 26, 2016, 03:31:47
June 6, 2017???

What's the bet this will just fade away never to be heard of again...

I hope so....

Me too

Surferdude · **Reply #49: October 26, 2016, 08:14:28**

Me 3.
I thought the original story said the buy was the subject of a police chase and crashed some minutes later.
Delayed reaction?

AlanHo · **Reply #50: October 26, 2016, 08:29:16**

How can they justify taking 10 months between the offence and final decision. I reckon the stress of waiting that long for the cop is punishment enough.

As an aside - what has happened to the biker?

rustynutz · **Reply #51: October 26, 2016, 11:13:38**

Good to see how many of our members condone the breaking of our laws and getting away with it scot-free...when its a copper!....

Surferdude · **Reply #52: October 26, 2016, 11:43:33**

It's the same old story. Don't break the law in the first place. Or accept the consequences.

rustynutz · **Reply #53: October 27, 2016, 01:14:53**

Consequences need to be consistent though.

Both parties broke the law...
Why should it be okay for the copper to escape punishment when we fully expect the motorcyclist to be dealt with harshly?

At the end of the day they both endangered the public through their actions...

Police aren't above the law!

FatBoy · **Reply #54: October 27, 2016, 04:22:11**

What Rusty said!!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

beerman · **Reply #55: October 27, 2016, 07:11:34**

Hang on,

He is facing a court, how is that escaping punishment? He has the right to plead not guilty and make the crown prove their case, like everyone else (Your OMCG mates do this at every opportunity).

There are plenty of defences he will no doubt raise, the Magistrate will make a determination in the hearing. This is how the law works.....For everyone.

If there is a decision that there is insufficient evidence to proceed, well guess what, thats how the law works for everyone too (This often happens when your OMCG mates intimidate people and pursuade them from giving evidence).

Only difference is that this matter will be overseen by both internal and external investigative bodies.

He can be twice punished for the one offence (and even punished internally if he is found not guilty) and in some states, his ability to refuse to answer self incriminating questions is removed for internal matters (and the information from that investigation can be used to find further evidence for the criminal).

Yeah mate he is getting off easy.

rustynutz · **Reply #56: October 27, 2016, 07:30:22**

You're jumping the gun there, Beerman...

The comments re escaping punishment was in reference to what some of our forum members believe should happen...

As for your continued references to my "so called" OMCG mates.... It's time you got over it, disagreeing with the draconian so-called 'anti-bikie' laws doesn't make them MY friends...

eye30 · **Reply #57: October 27, 2016, 08:10:07**

Any reporting re the chap on the bike?

AlanHo · **Reply #58: October 27, 2016, 09:52:32**

Quote from: eye30 on October 27, 2016, 08:10:07

Any reporting re the chap on the bike?

See all the answers to post #50..............

FatBoy · **Reply #59: October 27, 2016, 10:06:32**

@beerman, he is not escaping punishment however, one member stated that waiting 10 months for a court case is punishment enough. As you said, he does have the right to plead "not guilty" and accept the court's decision to delay the case. That is not punishment, that is the legal system.

As for calling OMCG member @rustynutz's "mates", I think that is a bit unfair and unwarranted. As Rusty said, just because he doesn't agree with the laws, doesn't make the OMCG members his mates. Heck, I agree with some of the things that politicians say, it doesn't make them my mates.

IMO, both parties should be subject to the law equally. It shouldn't matter if you are rich, poor, black, white or brindle; if you break the law, then you should face punishment.

BTW, we don't have a justice system, it is a legal system.