[Surferdude]

@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.

Whilst I understand the point you are making, if you take that to it's logical conclusion, no police officer could exceed the speed limit, go through a red light, or use any form of in car communication device (phone, radio etc) in order to stop an offender. Geez, how dangerous are road spikes? Imagine if a member of the public used some to slow down traffic in his suburban street? It has been argued that throwing a pad of tickets at the rider put the public at risk. Then ditto the other examples just listed. High speed chases are already called off, so where do we draw the line?

[FatBoy]

@Surferdude, police can legally speed, run red lights, use mobile phones while driving, etc.  I don't believe that throwing things at motorists is, otherwise he wouldn't have been charged. 

We draw the line at what the authorities deem legal.  If in the court case it is determined that throwing the item was justifiable in the circumstances, then that is it.

[Surferdude]

@Surferdude, police can legally speed, run red lights, use mobile phones while driving, etc.  I don't believe that throwing things at motorists is, otherwise he wouldn't have been charged. 

We draw the line at what the authorities deem legal.  If in the court case it is determined that throwing the item was justifiable in the circumstances, then that is it.

We'll have to agree to disagree. Unfortunately I have seen first hand some of the shit out police forces have to deal with. We hamstring them in far too many ways IMHO.

[FatBoy]

I think we are on the same side, Trev.  However, I don't think that Police should be above the law.  Should we allow them to shoot first and ask questions later?  Or comply with the regulations which are laid down for them.

At the end of the day however, it was always said to me in relation Rules of Engagement, "It is better to be tried by twelve men, than be carried by six."  In other words, if you breaking the law results in you living, then do it.

[The Gonz]

That reminds me of a directive limiting use of equipment to what was issued only, in the war zone. I happily contravened directives which stopped me from functioning safely.

[rustynutz]

Unfortunately I have seen first hand some of the shit out police forces have to deal with. We hamstring them in far too many ways IMHO.

What choice do we have though, I for one don't want to see us follow America's shoot first, ask questions later attitude...although gauging by some of the responses to some of the threads I've posted over the years I suspect plenty of you lot would relish it...

[CraigB]

Talk about getting blown out of proportion, throwing a piece of cardboard at a motorcyclist is hardly American shoot first policy.

As the rider had his accident some km's down the road after the throwing incident then it can't possibly be related to his crashing, it'll be deemed as the riders erratic and dangerous actions were the cause of his incident, on the cops end of the charge I think the judge will throw it out of court, it was a defensive behaviour and it's a piece of card board for Christs sake but I dare say he'll still be hit with internal reviews on the matter.

[eye30]

But.........what punishment has the bike rider got.......if any?

[FatBoy]

Talk about getting blown out of proportion, throwing a piece of cardboard at a motorcyclist is hardly American shoot first policy.

As the rider had his accident some km's down the road after the throwing incident then it can't possibly be related to his crashing, it'll be deemed as the riders erratic and dangerous actions were the cause of his incident, on the cops end of the charge I think the judge will throw it out of court, it was a defensive behaviour and it's a piece of card board for Christs sake but I dare say he'll still be hit with internal reviews on the matter.

So if I fire a gun at somebody and it misses, then by your logic, it wasn't illegal. 

The policeman has been charged with "intentionally throw object at vehicle / vessel", not causing the person to crash.  Let the courts decide what the punishment, if any, there is.  From my understanding there is no direct link between the throwing of the object, and the crash.

As I have said before, police shouldn't be above the law, otherwise it leads to actions where the police response will be that the ends justify the means.

[Dazzler]

Unfortunately I have seen first hand some of the shit out police forces have to deal with. We hamstring them in far too many ways IMHO.

What choice do we have though, I for one don't want to see us follow America's shoot first, ask questions later attitude...although gauging by some of the responses to some of the threads I've posted over the years I suspect plenty of you lot would relish it...

That scenario is a long way from totally restricting the police actions to the extent that they can barely breathe on offenders.

[FatBoy]

That scenario is a long way from totally restricting the police actions to the extent that they can barely breathe on offenders.

I agree, Dazz.  However, the police themselves have rules that they must abide by, which are different to our.  If they break those rules then they should face the consequences.

I don't know what happened to the motorcyclist, but I do believe that he should face the full extent of the law, and not be slapped on the wrist (as often happens in our legal system).

[Lakes]

Without putting people into minority group's, i would lay odd's the rider is a …….., know that area u can play spot the Aussie!! they always give the cop's a hard time. that cop six foot of dynamite , with a short wick!
but i would not get involved in debate , but as a motorcyclist i'll tell you 48 years riding in that state & lost count of the number of breath tests i have done on road side, never had a problem, if the cop signals stop you stop no problem.
Dave we do have 50kph in Sydney but never see breath tests set up in those area's as mostly low traffic so i would expect it to be 60kph or 70kph zone.

[eye30]

.

I don't know what happened to the motorcyclist, but I do believe that he should face the full extent of the law, and not be slapped on the wrist (as often happens in our legal system).

So does anyone know whether they have been charged?.

[rustynutz]

Try google, Lester... 

I've tried to find details but it's pretty hard when there are no names mentioned... 

[Doggie 1]

Dave we do have 50kph in Sydney but never see breath tests set up in those area's as mostly low traffic so i would expect it to be 60kph or 70kph zone.

It was reported as in a 50 km/h zone in the media.
Mobile RBT set up just past the school zone of Hannahs Road Public School, Narwee; 50 zone.

The rider evaded two RBT stations, not just that one.

The police said that the motorcyclist is 21, and "evaded a stationary random breath test site on Littleton Street, Riverwood, after being signalled to stop by police." It's alleged that the cyclist then sped down Hannans Road, where he was signalled to stop by a second RBT site, and refused to stop once again.

The police state that a "short pursuit" ensued, but was "terminated due to safety concerns". Police were then called to the scene of a collision between a motorcycle and a vehicle, where the motorcyclist fled the scene.

A 21-year-old man was arrested near the scene, and was taken to the Bankstown Hospital for "mandatory blood and urine samples", with charges pending.

[rustynutz]

It was reported as in a 50 km/h zone in the media.
Mobile RBT set up just past the school zone of Hannahs Road Public School, Narwee; 50 zone.

Scanning the location using google maps I can confirm it was definitely a 50kph zone... 

[CraigB]

Talk about getting blown out of proportion, throwing a piece of cardboard at a motorcyclist is hardly American shoot first policy.

As the rider had his accident some km's down the road after the throwing incident then it can't possibly be related to his crashing, it'll be deemed as the riders erratic and dangerous actions were the cause of his incident, on the cops end of the charge I think the judge will throw it out of court, it was a defensive behaviour and it's a piece of card board for Christs sake but I dare say he'll still be hit with internal reviews on the matter.

So if I fire a gun at somebody and it misses, then by your logic, it wasn't illegal. 

The policeman has been charged with "intentionally throw object at vehicle / vessel", not causing the person to crash.  Let the courts decide what the punishment, if any, there is.  From my understanding there is no direct link between the throwing of the object, and the crash.

As I have said before, police shouldn't be above the law, otherwise it leads to actions where the police response will be that the ends justify the means.

I think it has to be put back into perspective, firing a gun is just a bit more serious than flicking a piece of cardboard  under the reasonable force laws I think it'll be tossed out of court as a piece of tossed cardboard is hardly as serious as the motorbike speeding towards you, out of defence the officer has flicked a piece of cardboard at a rider that could have killed him or others.

[rustynutz]

You're only assuming it was a piece of cardboard, Craig...   

[rustynutz]

CRIMES ACT 1900 - SECT 49A Throwing rocks and other objects at vehicles and vessels

[CraigB]

You're only assuming it was a piece of cardboard, Craig...   

It was cardboard or thick paper as you can see it float when it hits the road.

[rustynutz]

It looks more substantial than a piece of cardboard, especially the way it bounced/skated across the road... 

Regardless, it doesn't change the fact that he threw an object at a vehicle (which could easily have caused the rider to lose control) and his superiors have seen fit to have him charged.

It does concerns me though that it has been deferred so many times now.
By the time he fronts Court again it will be something like 18 months since the offence occurred. You've got to wonder why the delay... 

[Doggie 1]

The main offender could have killed several people with his actions.
And they are seniors, not superiors.
But it is not his seniors officers who saw fit to charge him. It is Police Internal Investigations, who as I have said before have charged him to appease the media and certain sections of the community. That is all.
They would not have been even aware of the offence they eventually used. They dug deep to find that one.
And it is difficult to comment any further when we don't know what has happened to the main offender and the cause of the incident in the first place, and when he appears in court.

[rustynutz]

Splitting hairs, Dave...whoever it was, they decided to charge him... 

As for what has happened to the main offender...why is that relevant?

[Doggie 1]

Because he caused it, Rusty.
He refused to stop at TWO RBTs and endangered several lives and led police on a pursuit.
And yet all you are concerned with is an endangered police officer throwing a light weight object at the offender to try to stop him from  killing someone! Really, are you serious? 
I am not going to argue, but honestly, .............................

[rustynutz]

Nothing the rider did MADE the cop throw the object, Dave....he did that on his own accord....

Like I said previously, that object could've caused the rider to crash, injuring not only the rider but possibly injuring or killing an innocent bystander or occupant in one of the stopped cars...

[Doggie 1]

 
I am not going to argue, Rusty, as I said.
But again, honestly?
Are you serious?       

[CraigB]

 

[The Gonz]

This is feeling very familiar, 'round the buoy once again and not helping. No new information or ideas? Stop posting - everyone.

[Doggie 1]

I have.

[rustynutz]

No you haven't....