POLICING BACK TO THE FUTURE?

by CAA | Feb 2, 2022 | Library, Uncategorized

2nd February 2022

Media reports of Victoria Police launching a community-focused policing delivery model is heartening for the CAA. The CAA has advocated for this approach for many years.

Dating back to 2016, not long after the CAA was formed, we published the BluePrint document. http://caainc.org.au/the-blue-print-2/?doing_wp_cron=1643668280.3755130767822265625000

That five former executive Police published the document including no less than three retired Chief Commissioners, disappointingly the Police administration of the day did not even exercise the courtesy of an acknowledgement, let alone actioning the views of highly experienced former Police. They thought they knew best.

Like everything new, there are some identifiable shortcomings.

In the news, reference was made to reports that have to be submitted to, we assume measure effectiveness and participation.

Community Policing is mainstream policing and not a desirable accessory; the generation of more reports is the anthesis of community involvement effectiveness.

Making reports is not community policing and detracts from it. The time spent by Police in front of a computer screen must be addressed rather than added to, so Police have the time to engage with the community.

The introduction of information gateways will dramatically gift operational Police their most valuable resource, time to perform their proper function. The ability of contributors to the information malaise must be curtailed from hitting the send, ‘all’ button.

Micromanaging the program from on high is counterproductive when the only statistics that really matter are those already forming part of the quarterly crime statistics.

Inserting effective accountability at command levels will perform the task of ensuring the change in direction is embraced.

Victoria Police, to its credit, has announced and is implementing a Police schools program, but there is still another critical piece of the community Policing Model that has not been addressed.

One of the most successful Police community programs targeted directly at the youth cohort has been effectively knobbled by past police administrators.

The program was born in Victoria in 1976 and has been exported to all other States and Territories within Australia and a number of other countries. We invented something every other jurisdiction benefits from, except this State.

The misguided police administrations in Victoria that cancelled community Policing were not embarrassed, as they should have been, that the national program was embraced and nurtured in all other police jurisdictions except Victoria, where it started.

The program is Blue Light, and despite all efforts to close it down, it has survived against the odds.

That credit must go to the Blue Light Board.

But that is then, and now we must look forward and rebuild the Blue Light core function.

It will, however, fall to the Chief Commissioner to determine the effectiveness of the rebuild.

The incentives for Police to participate voluntarily must be reintroduced, and in return, Victoria Police will benefit from the positives that police-involved gain from this program as much as the community they serve.

There have been suggestions that Disco’s are no longer in vogue, but that is a myth, as any of the entrepreneurs in the Night Club industry will attest. Underage Disco is invariably booked out. Demand exceeds supply by a very large margin.

Give a child a chance to meet with their friends in a safe environment to enjoy their music and the social benefits (critical now in this post COVID era) and watch them flock to the opportunity.

Many of today’s youth had a parent who attended Blue Lights, so a favourable market exists ready for the opportunity.

The benefits to Victoria Police in a resurgence cannot be understated.

Corruption watchdogs throw in the towel

by CAA | Dec 16, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized

17th December 2021

Two of the three entities created to control Corruption have given up.

That is the most generous interpretation that can be applied to the report in the Herald Sun, 15^th of December 2021, MPs urged to clean up parliament from corrupt behaviour,  detailing views allegedly expressed by the Ombudsman Ms Glass, who coincidently is well regarded by the CAA, and the IBAC Commissioner.

They are seeking help from Parliamentarians to clean up Corruption. It is a questionable assumption that politicians all know about Corruption or imply they are involved in it.

Firstly inferring that politicians are corrupt as a class is sure to raise the ire of decent, hardworking politicians being tarred with the same brush. Secondly, this admission is an admission that the two agencies have failed –  it cannot be interpreted any other way- exposing, fighting and charging the corrupt is their job.

The plaintive cry of the watchdogs reported,

 “…the agencies admitted that new laws introduced after Labor’s redshirt scandal had not done enough to stop political parties from misusing public money for their political gain.”

Perhaps the watchdogs have not done enough – they blame the political parties. Parties or entities do not commit crimes; people do.

This admission is unbelievable, and given the legislation that already existed before the redshirts debacle, this is a terrible indictment on the agencies and their relevance or capacity to undertake the tasks they are charged with.

Both agencies should refresh or extend their knowledge of the Crimes Act 1958. They will find all the Powers they should ever need within those annals.

It is pointless for politicians to take action to solve the problem because some are the problem, and others clearly cannot expect support from the watchdogs that have admitted defeat.

The watchdogs have become just observers, not functionaries in the corruption arena.

It was not that long ago a politician used his issued government car to deliver goods for his hardware business, and he was charged and convicted. Fast forward, still preceding the Redshirts, and a Politician used his government allocated transport to ferry his dogs and was never charged. Why not?

The Crimes Act 1958 can be applied in that and the Redshirts Rort.  And what about the Common Law charge of Misconduct in Public Office?

There are many other examples of corrupt conduct by both Politicians and bureaucrats, where the watchdogs have demonstrated there is just an inability or unwillingness to act, and now we know why – they have given up.

These agencies’ primary role is to investigate and where the legislation has been breached lay charges. It is not up to them to second guess the Courts; it is the Court’s role to determine guilt or innocence, not the watchdogs.

Time for a Truth and Integrity Commission willing to act in the public interest.

WHAT HAS HAPPENED – TO OUR DEMOCRACY?

by CAA | Nov 12, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized

13th November 2021

Recent events – recent in terms of Victorian history – have been ominous.  A friend early on pondered whether the actions of the Andrews government threatened our democratic freedoms, and I naively thought not.  But, upon reflection, I now share his concerns.  Consider:

• We cannot get rid of even the worst government within less than four years.
• The Governor cannot sack the government without a recommendation by the Premier.
• Wartime-like restrictions, curfews and lockdowns can be imposed by edict – supposed to be used only for stringent emergency and temporary use but actually imposed on us for world-record durations.
• Parliament, supposedly elected to represent us and protect us from tyranny, has been cut back by half. The government refuses to follow the laws and conventions on openness, accountability and honest dealing with the electorate.
• Public officials can conspire to injure citizens, throw them out of lawful employment and falsify “evidence” of criminal activity against them – without remorse, apology or explanation – and be protected by the organs of government.
• Members of the ruling elite can engage people at public expense to pursue those members’ private purposes in seeking election – and again evade the sanctions of the law under the protection of the organs of government
• Officials can spend $30 million of public money (for hotel quarantine) without any discernible record of who authorised this, what steps were taken to ensure the money went to a lawful supplier of the services sought, or even whether the supplier could reasonably be expected to do so.
• We can now – apparently – be compelled to get jabbed, twice, with chemicals we might personally object to, or be tossed on the scrap heap of social outcasts; locked out of work, milk bars, cafes and footy grounds.  (But judges are exempted.)

What has happened to what used to be perhaps the most liveable, most free, most robust society, with a Police Force that was renowned for Upholding the Right?

What has happened to our Democracy?

Actually, something like what happened in Germany between the first and second world wars – creeping tyranny.

The encroachments started in small ways as ours did;  people stood quietly by, as we have.  The despotic manipulators enjoyed adulation as “saviours” – and thus were perceived to be beyond accountability or scrutiny.

That, and worse, is what has been happening to Democracy in Victoria.

What is even more worrying than what has already happened, is what is going to happen according to this government’s agenda.

Under a bill presently before the Parliament, the limitations of the temporary State of Emergency are washed away, and a new social management order would come into being.

The new bill is breathtaking in its grab for power, giving politicians the ability to quash dissention without any actual health issues, but merely the perceived threat – that is, perceived by those politicians.

And as reported in Lawyers Weekly this week (see ref. below):

“A damning letter opposing Victoria’s new pandemic legislation granting Premier Dan Andrews and the government “extraordinary powers” to rule the state without proper parliamentary oversight or the usual checks and balances has extended from 14 signatories out to 60, including Queen’s counsel and the Victorian Bar Association.”

Politicians, not public health officials, are to be given sweeping powers to declare pandemics and enforce public health orders for three months at a time, with “unlimited and practically unreviewable” power to rule the state by decree on a long-term basis.

The letter, circulated at the end of October, has since amassed support from another 46 Queen’s Counsel (QCs) concerned that the low threshold and extraordinarily broad definitions within the bill will make it “practically impossible” for an individual to challenge the merits of a public health order in court. Instead, if a person wishes to, they must reach a “very high bar” of establishing legal unreasonableness.

Under existing arrangements, the emergency powers given temporarily to the Chief Health Officer are, at least theoretically, subject to checks and controls by elected officials, but it is plain that this government does not allow supposedly temporary and emergency powers to stand in the way of its casual, world-record, lockdown of the populace when it suits it.

Curfews are nothing compared to what faces us in the future.

“….we can expect a pandemic declaration to be in force for the foreseeable future. Thus, the minister’s power to make pandemic orders will remain in place for the foreseeable future,” the lawyers’ letter read.

Once a declaration is in place (the stroke of a pen) the only other requirement for the minister to make a public health order is that the minister must believe the order is “reasonably necessary to protect public health”. Not only is this threshold low, the QCs argued, but it is enough if the minister “subjectively believes that the order is reasonably necessary”.

This could allow orders for the detention of persons, restriction of movement, regulating public or private gatherings, requiring the provision of information, and requiring testing and medical exemptions of residents, say the lawyers.  

THIS IS ALREADY HAPPENING

The bill also provides “extremely broad and unchecked powers on authorised officers” that include taking any action or giving any direction “that the authorised officer believes is reasonably necessary to protect public health”. It could mean an individual authorised officer will single-handedly have the power to shut down a political protest if the officer subjectively believes it is reasonably necessary.

“It is, in our view, no answer to these criticisms to say that the bill contains more safeguards than presently exists for the emergency powers under the Public Health and Wellbeing Act 2008. The emergency powers are just that – extraordinary powers that are available to be exercised for only a very short period,” the letter said.

“It is one thing to allow temporary rule by decree to deal with an unforeseen and extraordinary emergency in circumstances of extreme urgency. It is something else altogether to entrench rule by decree as a long-term norm. In our view, this is antithetical to basic democratic principles and should not be allowed to happen.”

The CAA would also highlight what we understand is a substantial increase in recruiting activity for Authorised Officers, as the Government /Premier is building their own Political Police wing (under the guise of health) with extraordinary powers that police officers cannot and should not have.

Interestingly, this Health Police Force is predominantly managed in its current form by former airline cabin Staff who the Premier rescued from the crash of the airline industry, with no training or qualification for their new role.

It is fascinating to observe the Premier defending his new push for power on the grounds that it increases “transparency and accountability” at the same time as:

• the government resolutely refuses to release the existing health advice and modelling given to it, and
• the government cannot even remember who brought about the hotel quarantine disaster that led directly to 800 deaths.

This legislation must not be allowed to succeed.

https://www.lawyersweekly.com.au/biglaw/32999-legal-bodies-qcs-oppose-new-victorian-pandemic-bill

IS OUR IBAC COMMISSIONER UP TO THE JOB?

by CAA | Nov 10, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized

10th November 2021

The re-emergence to prominence of the Red Shirts criminal artifice has come as quite a shock, mainly to the perpetrators, who had good reason to believe their crimes were well buried.

To the rest of us, guarded relief that the offenders involved in these crimes may, at last, be brought to justice.

That it has not happened thus far, reeks of corruption. gross incompetence or other impairments within the authorities designed to deal with corruption by those employed on our behalf to manage our State.

Strong suspects contributing to this inaction, apart from self -interest is warped ideology that spurs minions to not rock the boat and report corruption.

‘There are none so blind as those who do not wish to see.’

The Red Shirt ruse is only part of this story.

The corruption that intervened in the proper application of the Law will, however, become the bigger story.

If as opinionated by Herald Sun reporter Kieran Rooney (9/11/21) is accurate, Robert Redlich, the IBAC Commissioners, ‘jaw hit the floor’, when disgraced Labor MP Adam Somyurek dropped the bombshell that the Premier was aware of the Red Shirts rort

We will have to look more closely at the role and function of IBAC and the Commissioner.

We are not suggesting the allegations against the Premier are true, but our concern is the reaction of the Commissioner.

Through our contacts, from eminent legal practitioners to former executive police who had worked with Robert Redlich, the evaluation of his character was consistent. His integrity is of the highest order and he and would not bend to external influences, yet paradoxically, it would seem he was shocked by the evidence.

It seems incredible that the majority of the community has long formed the view that the Red Shirts program was criminal. The close association between the Red Shirts and the Premier demonstrated by the proliferation of media photographs of him proudly interacting with the participating Red Shirts, was too blatant to miss.

For the Premier to deny any knowledge of the artifice is challenging to accept and that, he was allegedly interacting, should not be a surprising revelation for the Commissioner. To be surprised by the allegations suggests, in the absence of any other explanation, that he has led an insular existence that has created a lack of understanding that the rest of us have grasped.

I don’t think anybody other than perhaps blinkered supporters of the Premier would accept he did not know.

Whether that knowledge extends to criminality is doubtful; however, those directly involved in falsifying documents and other nefarious activities must be held to account for the crimes they have committed.

In a civilised society, criminality cannot be allowed to be airbrushed away, whether involving the elite political class or the ordinary citizen. Doing so condones crime and can destroy democracy, it is that important to quell.

Much has been said about the amount of money paid back to the State by the Labor party over this fiasco. That repayment is an admission of guilt no matter which way you slice or dice it, and we would suggest it never would have been repaid had it not been exposed.

That this repayment in some ways mitigates; criminality is one of the greatest fallacies ever reported.

To give an example to understand the misinformation that has been proffered over this Red Shirts crime is a recent example in the community that gives context by disparity.

Recently reported was the story of a suburban mum who committed substantial fraud on her employer over some time and when confronted pleaded guilty to the offending.

Ironically and consistent with the Red Shirts issue this mum and her family went to extraordinary lengths to repay the poor victim the thousands stolen; however, she was sentenced to a minimum of a two-year jail for her crime.

Using the Red Shirts paradoxically, she should not have been charged, let alone convicted, as she paid the money back.

A rationale that should never be countenanced by any stretch.

Is this another example of one set of rules for the first and second estates and another for the third?

Let’s hope that the IBAC Commissioner will see through this fog and go after not only the perpetrators of the Red Shirts artifice but, more importantly, the facilitators that conspired to stymie prosecutions are arguably the greater criminals and their deeds must be exposed.

If we are ever to reign in corruption it is the facilitators that must be prosecuted.

The impact of corrupt leaders is to generate more corruption, and when they err, they must be held to account because if they are not, the next layer down sees it as acceptable, as explained by the Somyurek evidence. The corruption permeates down through the organisation, in this case, the State, a situation that is now evidenced in Victoria.

Unless this rot is arrested then the consequences become more dire for all of us.

The IBAC Commissioner will be judged by how he deals with this matter; or is our IBAC only good for prosecuting perpetrators for ‘Pillow Talk’?

To support the work of the CAA go to http://caainc.org.au/support-caa/

POLICE DISCIPLINE INFLUENCED BY THE PERSON NOT THE EVIDENCE.

by CAA | Nov 7, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized

7th November 2021

There are some gross incongruities in the world of Police discipline; just ask some of the Police victims.

Over recent years one thing that has stood out in Police discipline meted out by either Vitoria Police Professional Standards Command (PSC) or matters investigated by the now-defunct Office of Police Integrity (OPI) or by the Independent Broad-based Anti-Corruption Commission (IBAC) is the blatant contradictions.

Take just two examples.

Most readers will remember the photographing and subsequent distribution of pictures of a well-known football identity arrested for stalking, dressed as a female.

It was interesting how the privacy breach of the stalking perpetrator overshadowed the despicable behaviour of stalking an innocent female victim by the media, IBAC and Police Command, ‘wokeness’ trumps the crime of stalking. The impact of that crime was diluted dramatically except for the victims.

It is important to note that there were many Police tracked and identified as either having received the images or distributed them further.

A raft of sanctions were imposed on those Police, including criminal charges, dismissal, and other penalties. But notably, they were all of lower ranks.

The CAA does not excuse the behaviour but is critical of the disproportionate outcome to the conduct identified.

Particularly when you consider that the offensive material distributed by the police members was targeted and generally remained internal.

Contrast that with former Assistant Commissioner Bret Guerin, the Commissioner in command of the PSC responsible for internal investigations into corruption and other discipline issues distributing vile and offensive comments, a criminal offence, trolling over many years under at least three pseudonyms on public media sites.

Subsequently admitting his guilt publicly in the media after being exposed, not by the corruption watchdog, but the CAA, working with other victims, but he was never charged or disciplined.

It should also be noted that Guerin would have been the primary conduit between IBAC and Victoria Police, and he was involved in criminality, unbelievable.

Critically, however, the main issue is that the Police involved in the distribution of photographs of the stalker under arrest were apparently all identified by the footprints left in the stratosphere of the internet.

Compare that investigation and outcome with the Guerin matter where there does not appear that any effort was applied to track down who the audience of the Troll were, or was it an embarrassment to identify his supporters.

Guerin’s behaviour stands out, and his crimes were substantially aggravated on a number of fronts, not the least his rank in the Victoria Police and his role as the gatekeeper of police discipline.

• Guerin was committing the crime of using a Carriage Service for menacing, harassing or offensive purposes which attracts a penalty of up to three years in jail. He committed this crime on multiple occasions and potentially others like Misconduct in Public Office for somewhere north of six years (that we know about). A recidivist criminal. And we suggest not likely to avoid jail if convicted. But to be convicted, one needs to be charged.
• The first formal complaint that we are aware of was made to the Chief Commissioner VicPol early in 2016, identifying the Internet Protocol Address (ISP) of the computers used to commit the crimes. Guerin left clumsy internet footprints everywhere.
• He initially got to investigate his own complaint.
• We are also aware of other issues related to similar indiscretions by him that, on our estimates, put the cost to taxpayer’s emanating from his blunders in the region of half a million dollars. Still, he gets to keep his super and have all his legal fees covered.
• If he is charged with these offences, the State could not, in good conscience, fund his defence, particularly given the cost he has imposed on the State thus far.
• As distinct from the case of the football identity stalker, no effort was made to identify or track co-conspirators in these Guerin crimes.
• IBAC is satisfied that no influence of the values expressed by Guerin swayed his work. We assume they deduced that by asking the perpetrator, No doubt the perpetrator would be honest and frank on that point.
• He never showed contrition.
• He received no sanction for his offending.
• The exposure of the stalker’s photos was short-lived, but the Guerin matter spanned many years, and it would be unfathomable to believe that there was not an audience with parallel views who Guerin was servicing or to whom he was playing. Because it is without question, being deprived of positive reinforcement and encouragement, this behaviour would have ceased years ago.
• Further aggravating the culpability of Guerin and confirming that his behaviour was no whim, he used three pseudonyms that we are aware of over the years. Vernon Demerest, Clive Howlett-Jones and Grange Calendar the actions of an unrepentant recidivist offender, not just somebody getting ‘a bit excited on a keyboard’, as described by Chief Commissioner at the time, Ashton.
• These crimes required planning, and Guerin would be dealing with these types of offences regularly, making the crimes more egregious and would be well aware of the offences and the penalties. Still, presumably, he, like most crooks, did not expect to get caught, particularly when any complaints would come across his desk.
• It was unbelievable that it was his embarrassingly inane mistakes that led to his exposure. With at least one other deliriously inept misstep by Guerin not publicly exposed.

Perhaps that is because of the who, rather than the what was done.

The CAA has previously expressed concern that there is a real possibility that an enclave of like-minded individuals, his mates, a ‘Jedi Council’, exists in the upper echelons of Police and elsewhere, which is very concerning.

The integrity of the many good officers in the upper echelons needs to be cleared of any suspicion that must indeed exist, that they are tarred with the Guerin brush.

A skilled detective will always rely on the OTT about crime and criminals.

There is no such thing as a coincidence.

Once –    It could be a rush of blood, an opportunistic crime, or a     random error of judgement. (categorising many of the members distributing the photograph)

Twice–    It is not a coincidence; it is a pattern.

Thrice–   Entrenched habitual recidivism(categorises Guerin).

It would appear that Guerin can turn on a very effective ‘charm offensive’, which he exercised at IBAC and was noted in their report. It clearly worked for him there. They were conned.

Another experience from practised Investigators,

Criminals invariably use the ‘charm offensive’ for two significant reasons.

Firstly- it may make the process tolerable, and if they can win over the Investigators, there is every chance they will put a good word in for them at court.

Secondly- they hope the investigators will only focus on the crime to hand, and the other offending may not be looked at. Their rationale is that it’s better to go down for what they (the investigators ) know rather than what they find out, as that will cause a whole heap more pain.

It makes you wonder about what Guerin may have been hiding.

The CAA calls on the Government to appoint a special investigator to examine the Guerin matter and determine why he was not charged with a series of criminal offences and whether there is a like-minded enclave.

According to the IBAC report, they seized and gained access to electronic data, so the evidence still exists.

A court should decide his innocence or guilt, not bureaucrats with a vested interest to limit damage or protect others.

EX-TOP COP TROLLING, NOT SERIOUS ENOUGH TO BE CHARGED

by CAA | Oct 27, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized

27th October 2021

The latest Independent Broad-based Anti-Corruption Commission (IBAC) Special Report of Operation Turon into the activities of former Assistant Police Commissioner Brett Guerin is an extraordinary paradox.

Operation Turon lives up to its name, ‘Sliced bananas or other fruit rolled in a thin layer of pastry and deep-fried, served as a dessert or snack’ an apt description of the outcome of this investigation as far as Guerin is concerned, but leaves the victims wondering, ‘what does somebody have to do to be held to account?’

In his response to the IBAC report, Guerin showed little contrition for his behaviour. Throughout the report, as in his response, the Victims of this despicable behaviour did not receive any acknowledgement, let alone an apology from IBAC or, more pointedly, the Victoria Police.

That no criminal charges were laid is very concerning. At the time of his worst trolling, he was the Assistant Commissioner in charge of the Police Professional Standards Command (PSC) responsible for Police internal investigation. This certainly aggravated the behaviour substantially.

At the very least, a clear-cut breach of

 Section 474.17(1) of the Criminal Code 1995 (Cth) (“the Code”), a person commits an offence if they use a carriage service in a way that reasonable persons would regard as being, in all the circumstances, menacing, harassing or offensive. The “service” can include a fixed or mobile telephone service, an internet service, or an intranet service.

Additionally, there would seem to be another clear-cut case of,

Misconduct in Public Office applicable to at least the first reported complaint.

But of gravest concern to the CAA is the apparent lack of application of investigative skills to this Operation that is neither explained nor addressed. And the continued references to Assistant Commissioner Brett Guerin throughout the report is disingenuous.

Guerin lost his title the day he resigned. It is clear he would rather resign than face the humiliation he deserved. He ran to avoid accountability, and he should never have been allowed to retire.

It’s probably more interesting to look at what the investigation did not discover or what was not reported.

Guerin’s behaviour came to official notice when a complaint was lodged with VicPol and referred to IBAC in 2017.

We understand that a complaint was made by a Blogger who had identified the ISP numbers from a number of trolls by the Guerin pseudonym Vernon Demerest.

The blogger had identified one of the numbers as registered to Victoria Police Centre (VPC) and the other to a private address we presume to be Guerin’s.

VicPol, in the referral to IBAC, would indeed have included this information, or did they? Surely competent investigators would have spoken to all complainants and discovered the ISP addresses, if not passed on, or did they?

However, instead of investigating the matter, IBAC referred the case back to VicPol and surprise, surprise, it was referred to the then Assistant Commissioner Guerin, the head of Police Professional Standards (PSC). He could then investigate himself.

A response was sent to the complainant that there are hundreds of computers in VPC, and it would be impossible to identify who uses which computer.

That little gem we would have thought crossed the line into criminality, Misconduct in Public Office by Guerin, but not according to IBAC.

The not insignificant point that all police computers have to be logged on with a user ID escaped the detecting minds of those charged with that responsibility.

That IBAC did not find evidence that Guerin’s trolling and the vile racist, homophobic, etcetera trolls affected his decision making is extraordinary; obviously, they didn’t look too hard.

Reference was made to an incident that severe racially motivated rants at a police station abusing a senior sergeant’s ethnicity was somehow okay because Guerin said that it was. Guerin said it was taken out of context.

Somehow self-serving statements by a perpetrator are acceptable to be reported and relied upon – IBAC was conned.

That incident ended up with a substantial civil settlement to the Senior Sergeant.

Reading the report, other omissions are unbelievable.

There was the matter of a venue operator of ethnic heritage who was publicly shamed and libelled by Guerin on mainstream media. A Court in that case found in favour of the venue operator against the State (Guerin).

CAA is also aware of another settlement where racism was alleged by an applicant before a selection panel where Guerin was the convenor.  Evidence was forwarded to VicPol that showed dishonesty and unprofessionalism by Guerin in the conduct of the selection.  A human rights complaint was made. Again, this resulted in a significant settlement that VicPol had to pay.

So, there we have three non-Anglo’s suffering at the hands of Guerin’s decision making, coincidence? I don’t think so. It is a pattern of demonstrated criminal behaviour obviously ignored by IBAC.

The involvement of the CAA in this matter was that we identified the troll as Guerin. Not IBAC or VicPol.

Pilloried by former Chief Commissioner Graeme Ashton, Guerin, and another former Assistant Commissioner Fryer, the rhetoric espoused by Fryer in relation to the CAA and its Chairman Kel Glare appeared in written form under the name of Brett Guerin on our Facebook page.

The diatribe lasted only a short time before it was deleted when Guerin realised his mistake. Recorded by us before deletion, we were amazed to find another post within minutes with the identical diatribe, but under the name of Vernon Demerest, Guerin had blown it. What an idiot,

We had already advised Demerest that we knew it was a Police member and warned the author that the name would be blocked if the trolling continued.

With Guerin’s absurd behaviour, we delightfully responded to Demerest,’ We know who you are. It is a matter of professional standards. We doubt that Guerin would have been too concerned as he had already dodged the bullet once and would be confident his position would protect him.

This exposure was followed by a series of letters to the Chief Commissioner reporting the extent of the trolling, given that we had contact with a number of victims.

Had the CAA not identified Guerin, the trolling would have doubtless continued

Our correspondence of the 12^th of April 2017 fell on conveniently deaf ears. We didn’t even receive acknowledgements, let alone any comfort the matter was being addressed.

With apparent inaction by authorities, working with investigative journalist Cameron Houston of the Age, who in turn Neil Mitchell of 3AW, the Chief Commissioner, was asked about the trolling on air, and his response was to dismiss the matter as trivial. Somebody was getting a bit excited on a keyboard.

Guerin was then exposed and came onto the Mitchell Show to admit his trolling and dismiss it as trivial.

The following day Houston wrote a detailed article exposing the extent and the content of the vile trolling. All the significant media mastheads ran the headline about Guerin’s exposure.

The next day Guerin resigned.

The IBAC investigation looks very ordinary when the facts are disclosed, particularly those omitted in their report.

The other glaring anomaly in the IBAC report is the gloss over of the length of time Guerin was trolling for the better part of a decade.

IBAC expects the people of Victoria to accept that a person can troll for that long, espousing the most vial references without them being what the perpetrator thinks? Does it seem IBAC may be accepting that the Guerin ultra-ego is somehow a different person?

Very convenient for the perpetrator and very concerning that this stuff can perhaps sway our Corruption Watchdog.

The other great anomaly in this investigation is that no real or reported effort was made to track down the other players in this artifice.

We are expected to believe that Guerin did not have other sympathisers, barrackers or willing recipients of his work egging him on. We are not that naive.

It is beyond reasonable belief that others were not identified given IBAC had access to all Guerin’s electronic devices, and each transmission sent or received leaves a footprint. Maybe IBAC investigators need some internet training.

It gives us no comfort at all as we have never discounted a theory of an ultraright wing enclave within VicPol fed by Guerin’s rants.

The reality is there is every chance of a ‘Jedi Council’. It has certainly not been discounted.

We have drawn the obvious conclusion that our so-called Corruption Watchdog is lucky to come up with a whimper, but we note they are pretty good at getting a conviction for pillow talk.

Unfortunately, the IBAC is largely a paper tiger when it comes to matters of substance, such as the ICook Foods, Slug-Gate fiasco

WHEN IS A LAW NOT A LAW?

by CAA | Oct 20, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized

20th October 2021

The premier, Daniel Andrews, announced a new law recently – all those on a long list of private and public employees would have to be vaccinated or lose their jobs.  The list included those employed in our courts.

Promptly the Chief Justice, Anne Ferguson, announced that judges (among many others) were not bound to obey that law, and the Premier agreed.

The judge’s ruling was not preceded by any complaint, hearing, or other process.  It was not a ruling of the Court.  So was she saying that judges are above the law?   And did Premier Andrews then  agree with that?

That would be absurd, of course.  It has long been well known that our judges are not above the law.  So we are left with the obvious conclusion that Dan Andrews’ “law” is not actually the law at all.  He severely overreached himself – and he has agreed.  In what other ways has the Premier overreached himself, announcing “laws” on the whim of himself or some faceless fool?

One example may be the curfew that has locked Victorians in their homes, to no apparent good effect (and even while the trains kept on running)!  When a legal challenge was mounted the curfew was quietly abandoned, but so far as we know no apology was issued for the poor victims who had been fined in the meantime under the “curfew laws”.  Outrageous unlawful “laws” that purportedly have been reinstated at the time of writing.

Much of what the beloved leader has done during this pandemic has been overreach; the deadly “hotel quarantine disaster” of 2019, which led to the deaths of 800 Victorians, reminds us of how the implementation of government policy can sometimes be neither sound nor sensible.

Some policies, becoming de facto “laws”, just go too far to be countenanced.  Ask Justice Ferguson.

Mandatory vaccination policies might be seen as just going too far. The Premier’s “laws” have already wreaked economic havoc and saddled us with debts that our great-grandchildren will continue to bear.  Deliberately putting even more people out of work to satisfy the drive for uniformity, as opposed to individuality, goes too far to be countenanced.

Ever heard of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?  We Australians have signed up for that; which means we signed up of the right to refuse to undergo medical treatments if we so choose.  The writer, along with most of his friends and colleagues, is vaccinated.  That was our choice.  But we call the mandated vaccination program – and the policy to force people out of work if they choose to not be vaccinated – simply abusive and outrageous overreach.

SLUG- GATE CORRUPTION EXTRAORDINAIRE.

by CAA | Oct 12, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized

13th October 2021

It seems that if you are a victim of a crime, you can no longer rely on authorities to protect you and hold the perpetrators to account.

Or have we entered a new social phase where it’s not the crime but who committed it that determines whether the offenders are investigated and prosecuted.

This new and developing social order has historical equals.

You have to look no further than the French Revolution for a comparison. After suffering years of oppression, the Third Estate (us) revolted in a violent struggle resulting in many of the first Estates heads parting company with their bodies courtesy of the guillotine. Barbaric as that was, the modern metaphorical outcome for many may be just as humiliating and decisive and we would argue the process has started.

So, what to do when the ‘system’ is stacked. The team assisting Ian Cook, the victim of the Slug-gate affair, are vigorously exploring alternatives.

The team is currently discussing strategies with eminent legal practitioners who believe that the ‘system’ has failed.

As CAA has delved further into the Slug-gate debacle, where a family business, ICooks Foods, was the victim of criminal acts perpetrated by the ‘system’, we have been shocked at where the tentacles of this unlawful activity reach and into which bastions of our society it seems to have corrupted. Health Department, Victoria Police, Politicians, a raft of local governments, and the Government funded, Community Chef Board and management.

Evidence is constantly emerging, and that evidence now clearly implicates some very senior people. Conflict of interest, incompetence, conflicted relationships, and downright dishonesty, lying under oath, manipulating legal processes and suspected bribery are there to see for those willing to look.

The complete failure of these bastions is very perplexing and draws us towards the conclusion of a cover-up of more dire criminal proportions.

The complete failure thus far, by those charged with protecting us from corruption, have failed the Cook family and their employees in the first instant, but arguably on a higher plane the people of this State who pay the wages of those who are supposed to protect us. We also pay handsomely the people responsible for criminal acts against us; we pay for the privilege.

No wonder many Victorians feel reamed.

It is now two years since this egregious behaviour when Mr Cook lost his business and his employees their livelihood, perpetrated by Government officials and bureaucrats was reported to Police by Mr Cook, and a whistle-blower independently reported the corruption to IBAC.

Mr Cook, the victim, has no more confidence now than when the nightmare started that a proper investigation is being undertaken. He has lost count of the various investigators that the matter has been shuffled through.

This process is a bit like doctor shopping – eventually, somebody will achieve an outcome that comforts the Police hierarchy directly involved.

There are two documents currently available on the Parliamentary website that we would encourage you to read. Go to https://www.parliament.vic.gov.au/lsic-lc/inquiries/article/4807

The first, a report from Pitcher Partners, sheds light on motive and gives an insight into how our taxes are used and abused.

The second is a report from the Detectives that undertook the first ICooks investigation and perhaps indicates why some in Victoria Police would like to see this investigation buried, presumably because it may expose them.

The report details the criminality of the ICooks affair and was submitted to VicPol hierarchy in June 2020 sixteen months ago and still no action against the suspects, as far as the Victim knows.

That lack of action is inexcusable particularly given that many of the offences are straightforward and most of the Police work has already been done by retired Police.

It certainly gives the impression that a ‘cover-up‘, is afoot.

That VicPol is vigorously trying to block a Freedom of Information issue relating to ICooks through VCAT lends strength to the theory. The Government Model Litigant Rules seems to have been ignored in this matter.

On that point, you would have thought that within Victoria Police, they would have learnt that cover-ups rarely succeed, and when exposed, cause more pain than coming clean in the first instance, think Gobbo.

The evidence is so strong in the ICooks matter that the chances that a prosecution may fail are extremely low, and that takes into account prosecutors ‘running dead’.

And we are not referring to ‘Jay walking’. The offences we identified are all very serious and carry substantial jail time on conviction – we contend, nobody is above the law. The various agencies must pursue the perpetrators without fear or favour.

Whether the Police have some difficulty in pursuing the matter because of the victim’s alleged connection at the Parliamentary Inquiry to the death of an eighty-nine-year-old (89) patient at Knox Private Hospital is not known.

However, the inference was put to the Parliamentary Inquiry by multiple bureaucrat witnesses in an attempt to paint ICooks as the perpetrator without any conclusive proof. The poor lady weighed 38 kilos and was 185cm (Over 6 ft) tall, and she had a blood-born infection when presented at the hospital and other very serious health issues.

This patient was clearly in the ‘end of life phase’ at 98 and the alleged listeriosis infection, an easily treated pathogen, that can be cured in a hospital environment in a matter of a couple of days at most, would have had no influence on her ultimate demise which occurred many days after she was admitted to the Knox Hospital.

Conspicuous by their absence was the medical records and pathology reports routinely done in any Hospital that would have supported the bureaucrat’s assertions. With months to prepare for the Inquiry and unlimited resources this omission is significant.

A competent investigator would easily have found no connection between ICook Foods and the unfortunate death if they cared to look.

Evidence also exists, which is also irrefutable, that a number of people made false affidavits (Perjury) in an attempt to prosecute the victim – the malicious prosecutions all failed, not without substantial cost to the innocent victim and the public purse.

The investigations carried out by the ICooks team have established the truth within CCTV footage that shows that the perpetrators committed Perjury and attempted to Pervert the Course of Justice supporting the general thrust of the original investigators report.

The current work of the ICooks team will potentially spawn a new speciality within the Legal profession representing victims who have not received justice through bureaucratic interference, corruption, dishonesty, or ineptitude.

The ‘bureaucratic system’ is geared to protect itself and use the depth of its resources to protect perpetrators and to avoid accountability of those within. Ironically the people who decide to use these resources, our money, are generally seriously conflicted and are commonly the suspected perpetrators.

Thought must be given to how these decisions to dip into the public purse can be done without conflicted people making or influencing these decisions.

ICooks is exploring a new legal strategy and the perpetrators, which stretches into double figures, will now become quite twitchy as the metaphoric rope tightens its grip.

The ballot box is not the only weapon available.

You will be held to account.

You can count on it.

Victoria Police –Transparency? Accountability? Integrity? No!

by CAA | Sep 28, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized

28th September 2021

Why do we have a Police Force?  So that by and large we can live together as a community in peace and harmony.  Police Forces have no intrinsic merit of their own.  They exist solely for the service they can provide to the community.

In providing that service we could reasonably expect high ethical standards, transparency and accountability.  Are we seeing that with the Victoria Police?

The Lawyer X scandal dates back years and the Victoria Police fought tooth and nail, at the cost of millions of dollars, to keep Nicola Gobbo’s name from public disclosure. VicPol took the case all the way to the High Court, which found in December 2018 that Victoria Police’s conduct in using Gobbo as a confidential informer was “reprehensible” and had corrupted prosecutions.

The outcome of this sorry saga is yet to be played out.  Some of the police involved could end up in jail.

Following this debacle, one could expect that the lessons have been learned.  But have they?  It appears not.

There is currently a case pending before the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) where leave is being sought to call as witnesses four members of VicPol who were engaged in the first police investigation of the ICook Foods scandal.  An investigation that has been moved several times for reasons that have never been disclosed.  No transparency here, even when questions have been asked as to why the case was moved.

Who made the decisions to keep moving the case?  Why?  Who is accountable for these decisions?  Certainly no one at ICooks has been given any idea.  Victims of alleged corruption were ignored.  No accountability here.

One could expect that if there is nothing to hide then VicPol would be more than willing to accede to the request to call these police at the VCAT hearing.  Such is not the case.  VicPol is again taking every step possible to thwart the appearance of these three at VCAT.  Why?

There is an old legal adage, “Innocence demands the right to speak.  Guilt invokes the right to silence.”

A public body like VicPol should honour the “Model Litigant Rules” that apply to all Government Departments.  Why not in this case?

Ethical conduct, transparency and accountability must be embraced if we are to have faith in the integrity of the Victoria Police.

COVID and Policing – the dilemma

by CAA | Sep 26, 2021 | Library, Uncategorized

26th September 2021

Things have been really tough for Police over the last eighteen months or so when they are regularly dragged away from what they know is essential work to deal with the Covid Crisis.

The hard part of Policing is that the Police share many of the views of the broader community, so it is not surprising that there is disquiet in the ranks and that disquiet is growing.

Additionally, they are subject to a constant barrage of views, statements and questions by the Public demanding answer to questions that the Police do not have answers for because the Government has failed to inform the public and the Police adequately.

The Police are copping the brunt from the people, not the Government who made the decisions; they are ensconced well away from the conflict they have caused.

The most significant frustration for both the public, and the public who are Police, are the inconsistencies and double standards exercised regularly by the decision-makers. A set of rules for them and another for us promoting the concept that the ‘them’ are somehow immune from this disease.

The lack of clear direction in the management of this Pandemic and the use of blatant scaremongering has damaged the credibility of the managers of this Pandemic.

We have all been exposed to ridiculous pessimism of dire outcomes by the euphemism for information – modelling. Whether modelling ever gets it right is problematic as we have seen this now-discredited process fail over and over with climate change and now Covid.

We have all been exposed to misinformation, sometimes appearing as rationale material on the Web. Noting so-called reputable critics are former employees of vaccine producers, but we are never told the circumstances as to why they are ex-employees, as this may destroy their credibility.

We are entitled to be sceptical about these comments, along with a lot of other rubbish masquerading as fat on the internet.

Therefore, it is unsurprising that this disquiet is now manifesting into a movement or organisation of proportions sufficient to raise some interest and concerns.

To each of the many Police members involved in responding to the protests and expressing concern, the CAA empathises with your views. Many of us experienced similar pressures during our police service; however, as it was then, and is now, the proud and resilient Victoria Police will weather this storm.

The bottom line is that you have each taken an oath that must take precedent over your personal views, whether political or otherwise.

Most of the CAA are vaccinated, but we were fortunate to receive the jab when it was not overshadowed by inducements and other strategies to remove freedom of choice.

Most of us concluded it was a wise move partly because of age and, more importantly, the actual on-ground raw data showing the vaccine’s effectiveness.

We saw through the fog.

We also rationalised that having these vaccines processed by the same authority that processed all the other vaccines we are exposed to is reliable.

The list of vaccines that have not raised community ire are;-

So much of the hyperbole has been created by misinformation.

But we are concerned, and while understanding the angst of some Police members, when you signed on to this proud profession and took that oath, your life rules changed, which is a distinction that only Police share.

The vast majority of Police and Police Veterans share this common bond, and although when you cease to be employed (retire) from VicPol, you are never de-oathed, and that oath or its values will stay with you forever.

To all the members who are concerned, the correct way to deal with your stress is to, in the first place, do your sworn duty and ensure your Association acts on your behalf. That is what you pay your union dues for.

Your anger must be directed at the Government, in this instance, not command; remember, they have little choice as they are hamstrung by the ‘Sate of Disaster’ and the Health Orders.

We know they have made mistakes, but we have also seen them learn. Just compare the command and control of the earlier demonstrations in this tranche to the Shrine demonstration.

Please do not take any action that will risk your integrity because you can never get it back once compromised, and do not create additional load on your colleagues; that is not the police way.

We do not judge or criticise you as we have been to a similar place but encourage you to ‘Uphold the right’ because not doing so means anarchy.