Prime Minister Tony Abbott today (17/12/14) announced that the Secretary of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet and the NSW counterpart would conduct a review of the “Martin Place Siege”.
The media statement in full is below:
Martin Place siege – Joint Commonwealth – New South Wales review
17 December 2014
Prime Minister
Premier of New South Wales
In the aftermath of the horrific Martin Place siege and following the tragic loss of innocent lives, we must learn what we can from this incident and implement any changes necessary at the State and Federal level.
The Commonwealth and New South Wales governments will urgently conduct a review into the Martin Place siege and what lessons can be learned from the events leading up to and surrounding the siege.
As our State and Commonwealth law enforcement and security agencies work together to keep Australia safe, the review will identify important lessons for the future.
The review will examine and make recommendations about a wide range of issues including the circumstances surrounding hostage-taker Man Haron Monis’ arrival in Australia and subsequent granting of asylum and citizenship; what information agencies had about him and how it was shared; and whether relevant national security legislative powers could have been better used.
The Terms of Reference for the review are attached.
As we work to learn what we can from these terrible events, we acknowledge once again the courage and professionalism shown by our law enforcement and security agencies and emergency services.
We are determined to ensure that nothing stands in the way of ensuring the people who put their lives on the line to keep Australia safe can get their job done.
We have asked the Secretary of the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet and the Secretary of the New South Wales Department of Premier and Cabinet to commence the review immediately, drawing on expertise from within our relevant jurisdictions and consulting as necessary with other States and Territories.
The review will report by the end of January 2015.
Martin Place Siege – Terms of Reference
On 17 December 2014 the Prime Minister and Premier of NSW established a review, for consideration by the Commonwealth and NSW Cabinets, of lessons learnt from the Martin Place Siege of 15-16 December 2014.
The aim of the review is to identify lessons for the future: what worked well and what might be improved.
The review will examine and make recommendations in respect of Commonwealth and NSW agencies and the cooperation between them, in relation to:
- the arrival of Man Haron Monis in Australia and subsequent grant of asylum, permanent residency and Australian citizenship;
- support received from, or any other interactions Man Haron Monis had with, government social support agencies;
- information held by Commonwealth and NSW agencies about Man Haron Monis for the period prior to and following his arrival in Australia up until the siege including how any information relevant to public safety was shared between, and used by, agencies;
- the interaction of Man Haron Monis with the NSW justice system;
- Man Haron Monis’ access to firearms;
- whether, how and at what stage relevant national security legislative powers including Control Orders were or could have been used in relation to Man Haron Monis’ activities of security concern;
- any lessons learnt by the NSW and Australian Federal Police about the handling of the siege;
- the effectiveness of public communication including coordination of messaging between the Commonwealth, NSW and jurisdictions; and
- the effectiveness of coordination more generally between the Commonwealth and NSW.
The review will take account of the parallel investigations into the incident including by the NSW State Coroner, and NSW Police and Australian Federal Police.
The review will prepare a report for consideration by the Commonwealth and NSW Cabinets by the end of January 2015.
17 December 2014 – End of Statement
—————————————————-
One of the key parts of the review is “the interaction of Man Haron Monis with the NSW justice system”. In other words how was he out on bail given his extensive criminal background. Judges letting criminals out on bail was already in the media the in last few weeks and I wrote about it in the previous post. (Click here to read more) As I pointed out in that post Premier Baird and A-G Brad Hazzard are in cover-up mode and refusing to answer questions.
It is not the laws, it is the judges and until the government admit that then the problem will never be fixed
Normally these types of inquiries just sweep the matter under the carpet. This is not one of those times that the public would accept it. Already we have had the NSW Attorney-General Brad Hazzard trying to down play the situation and tell us new bail laws that come into effect in January will solve the problem. That will not stop dodgy judges and Mr Hazzard and Mr Baird know it.
Yesterday (16/12/14) we also had Nicholas Cowdery, the former NSW Director of Public Prosecutions, defending the judges who let Monis out on bail. Mr Cowdery said:
“NICHOLAS COWDERY: I think it’s a perfectly reasonable question. And the answer to it must be that when each of the judicial officers who were dealing with him were presented with the information that was available, the evidence on which they had to act, they applied themselves according to the law and made judgments about whether or not it was appropriate to release him on bail.”
“I think it would be very unfair now, with the benefit of hindsight, if there was criticism of judicial officers or indeed of police who dealt with him in the past. Because I think you can be assured that in a case like that, which involved very serious charges, the people involved would’ve been dealing with it absolutely properly and appropriately”
But later Mr Cowdery admitted knew every little about Monis and his offences and said “Well again, I don’t have the details of the offences, all I have are the bare figures.” (Click here to read more)
Cowdery knew bugger all and was in the media spinning dribble on behalf of the legal fraternity. If Cowdery was right then why bother with a review. Cowdery should shut his mouth and keep out of the way.
Regular readers of this website would know one of the victims is related to someone I have dealt with and have written about numerous times on this site and out of respect I will not say anything more than that. I only mention it as a number of readers have raised it with me.
I have walked past the Lindt Cafe (crime scene) 50 to 100 times as it is near the Queens Square Law Court Building which houses the NSW Supreme Court and Federal Court. I think the gravity of the situation hits home a bit more when you actually know the place where it is happening. I have never been inside and bought anything but I will make an effort next time I am in the area and show some support for the workers which I suggest everyone should.
It is all on Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s shoulders now as it is his department that is conducting the review so he cannot blame anyone else if they fail their obligations. Hopefully they do a good job.
This website is independent and reliant on donations to keep publishing. If you would like to support the continuance and growth of this site it would be greatly appreciated if you make a donation. Click on the button below to donate via PayPal or go to the donations page for other donation options (Click here to go to the Donations page)
If you would like to follow this site by email notification you can at the top right of this page and about twice a week you be notified when there is a new post on this site.
Please use the Twitter, Facebook and email etc. buttons below and help promote this post.
If you would like to buy a t-shirt or coffee mug visit my online shop (Click here to visit the shop)
Thank you for your support.
Categories: Tony Abbott
I expressed the very same comments about Mr Cowdery, he seems to think lawyer come out of this smelling sweet, this is the typical audacity of the legal society, it pious attitude and as much as it is tragic that a person who happened to be a lawyer lost their life, it is also poignant that in part the system she was part of has some accountability in this tragedy.
Well said Michele. I thought the same as you too. Once one of “their” own is murdered, it will make the rest of “them” think a bit more about the many slaps on the wrist these loony killers get. The police are frustrated beyond belief their hard work catching the nutters comes to naught.
Thank you CupCake, i do feel for the many police and detectives that show a great deal of integrity and courage in attempting to protect and bring some justice to our society and for the limited number of lawyers and judges who do still consider their professional duty above their opulent lifestyle. One lawyer in my state actually has in his bio that he is “married to a priest”, i assume this means after he flagrantly commits perjury, falsifies documents and makes unsubstantiated, outrageous false allegations in his attempt to protect predatory clients, he then has daily absolution and goes about in his delusional state of being a pillar of society. There is fundamental deep rooted corruption in this country, neither the general public nor the police will never get the facts or the truth, we will get the edited version of what this government thinks will benefit themselves and their policies.
Unfortunately due to the hubristic culture within the legal profession they think they are above us all and have not adapted from their medieval world, a is non existent. Hence the cracks (more like gapping canyons) through which Man Haron Monis’ fell through, a world where accountability through the use of quality standards is non existent. All judges were previously lawyers!
Utmost condolences are hereby expressed to Katrina’s family and for Kori (sp?) and his family.
Katrina, a colleague and Sandy Dawson’s sister.
So much motherhood by Katrina and potential, lost to her children, our society and the legal fraternity.
Do you really expect anything to improve, with all the political correct madness our cowards in government are forcing on us ? Tony was talking big about shirt fronting Putin and grabbing headlines with the brainless media, but in fact he was brown nosing to Obama. Putin is a man, like him or not. Tony is as weak as his mentor, silly little Johnny. Obama is almost at the point of declaring the US a Muslim country and Tony and the other pollies are too gutless to object to being told to do it here as well.
It looks a lot like Australia is the dumping ground for trash like monis and we are told to say nothing or be accused of a hate crime. Well I guess I am guilty. I hate bullies and terrorists and murdering bastards like Monis and I don’t accept he is One in a Million.
Lets face one fact and that is the Law and Justice are two entirely separate things in Australia now, with Australia needing Court Reform and the sooner the better…!!
Its time to throw off the old school colonial yoke and demand it before it is to late, I am sure the Politicians will all be ducking for cover, but perhaps it takes something like this to blow their cover and start to get things done..!!!
Speculation, but I believe his intended destination was the Supreme Court, but he got spooked by the woman who noticed the shotgun and took refuge in the Lindt Café.
Had he made the Supreme Court there’s no doubt damage would have been done……………and screeched about.
Let’s name the Elephant in the Room. The NSW State Govt changed the bail laws and softened them because of overcrowding in the prisons. Seems this softening of the bail laws went too far and forgot the ONE litmus test “in the public’s best interest” (and common sense). If this litmus test was applied, Man Haron Monis would have been refused bail.
The elephant in the room is not the bail laws it is the Judges who fail to enforce them. And why is what needs to be investigated.
Spot on Shane, this an Australia wide problem. Here in Victoria we are still suffering the Hulls appointed leftist lawyers on the bench who still believe in “compassion and rehabilitation” over and over again for our worst offenders. This mob are a cartel and do they stick together with their lawyer mates. The Judiciary must be made accountable, afterall, the police and all other statutory athorities are except this arrogant mob of rapacious sanctamonious embeciles. Lawyers, judges, magistrates and prosecutors indulge themselves in a huge conflict of interest which for some reason is not brought into question. I queried a crown prosecutor whether it was appropriate to dine with a defence barrister involved the same case. His reply, “We are above that”. Says it all in my book.
Judges and Magistrates should ask themselves a simple question before granting bail, ‘would I like this person to be living next to me whilst on bail?”
My experience with the court system and government bureacracy tells me years of bungling have been hidden in the handling of this Monis criminal.
Whoever bungled has blood on their hands and should go to gaol.
The question is: Is the Government (Cabinet + public servants) going to seriously investigate the legally delegated people (Ministers and Public Servants) who grant entry into Australia? Those people (probably Public Servants) in the Department of Immigration represent (by language etc.) many Countries. How far does the bias go in the department go, and how deep is the corruption? Think about it please.
I wonder how much the judges got paid from him to have him released on bail, there is no law, it is all about the $$$$$
I wonder whether it will be made public about who provided the bail money for this killer. An officer involved in the enquiry has spoken under the safety of anonymity and outed some information that would blow apart the protections afforded some in the community. All those of a certain Western Sydney community who came out of the woodwork saying that Man Monis did not reflect their beliefs, that they wanted to distance themselves from him and they did not condone his actions are the ones who fronted for his bail so that he was free to perpetrate this atrocity. The money trail apparently leading directly back to a Mosque in you got it! Lakemba. Almost like they were vouching for the man in being willing to put up so much money to have him freed. I bet we hear nothing about this via the MSM or from the enquiry unless they are now concerned that officers are willing to speak out about this horrendous situation.
Who provided the bail money is a trivial issue compared to why 2 judges allowed him out on bail.
I listened the whole interview last night with Leigh Sale, and was shocked by the comments made by this bubbler especially on the way he denies that the gunman of the Lindt Siege had previously committed serious offences, or similar, and it made me feel like how can possibly someone like this be interviewed in our most popular TV news rooms?? that was profoundly shocking, and more to this: he should be properly assessed & under scrutiny as his words betrays a lack of justice; under no circumstances this man should have been on bail.Revolting!
Correct me if I heard/saw wrong but on one of the news services it stated that Iran applied for extradition of this terrorist, Man Haron Monis & this request was rejected by the AustralianGovt.
If true,Why ? Certainly worth investigating to see if its true & if so the reasons behind it.
As for the judges who allowed him bail, no excuses are valid based on his past history. None of this would have occurred had they done their )highly paid) jobs properly
The blood is on their hands. Somebody please tell me otherwise !
It goes behind the Judges to those who pervert justice in the interests of political correctness and give perpetrators more consideration than victims. All in the proclaimed belief that it is better to let a few guilty parties off than punish an innocent (wo)man. Sure judges, and especially magistrates are inadequately trained in the intentions of our legal system but theirs is not to reason why just apply the law on the evidence placed before them.
About 50 years ago I was a sharp shooter in the Dutch army and when watching the television footage I was then wondering why on earth they didn’t shoot him when he stood in front of the window between 2 hostages. Then again had the police done so then they might have been criticized for shooting a man who might have been claimed was unarmed (regardless he had a weapon) or that they should have given him more time. While in principle I oppose the killing of a human being, and so the death penalty, in my view in such a siege one has to consider the safety and wellbeing of those held hostage above that interest of the criminal. In my view, the investigation should concern itself why didn’t the sharp-schooter do the job during the day when there was ample of opportunity to do so? It may be argued that they didn’t know if he had explosives, etc, but why is it that they can listen in to conversations from across the street if they want too but cannot do the same in a siege? No use for certain religious leaders now to denounce him and nothing having to do with religion when they let him do his thing for so many years! Too much concern for the rehabilitation of the criminal rather than the safety of citizens. Those involved in hideous crimes should not easily be let out on bail. While the issue of innocent until proven guilty might be a consideration where a parson already has a criminal record then caution on the side of error is warranted rather than to have innocent people lose their safety or even their lives.
Yes. It is a puzzle they didn’t “pick him off”. They must have known early on he was alone.
Gerrit & Dalia,
You are the first people I have heard bring up the subject of ‘taking this bastard out asap’. The Police Sharp Shooters/Snipers would have had a clear shot very early in the piece but the ‘Commanders’, who have all been watching too many American Movies wanted a ‘peaceful outcome’. Garbage!! As soon as there was a ‘clear shot’ he should have been extinguished. They knew who he was a lot earlier than they admitted and they knew he did not have explosives. The other question is:- Why was the SAS not called in from the outset? Oh no!! That would have put the Police ‘Commander’s’ nose out of joint. The SAS would have closed the situation down in about 10 minutes. Abbott offered:- ‘All the Federal assistance available’!! Why did the NSW Police refuse? It will be interesting to find out whose bullets killed the lady. Was it the ‘Shot Gun’ or was it Police projectiles? With all the gun fire and Stun Grenades at the end of it all………Will we ever know? The inquiry will NOT be transparent so don’t hold your breath.
In reply to Gerrit Hendriks post, I agree with his comment regarding the high visibility of the gunman, during the film footage of the siege, the murderer exposed himself in the doorway for thirty five seconds on one occasion there would have been ample time to expedite the pig with a clear shot.. but as he said there would have been an uproar from the do -gooders who have lost nothing in this tragic blunder by the authorities.The Sums lawyer was pathetic in his interview trying to justify his support in allowing bail. Allan from Myalup. WA
The law in this country is a bloody joke, crooked lawyers, crooked judges, nobody only the average public gets done for their crimes, the imbecile who caused the death of these two innocent people by allowing this psychopath to walk the streets should be jailed and never allowed in public office again. He is as guilty as the crank who pulled the trigger. Of course he will be investigated and will walk away with probably an OBE. Allan from Myalup WA
Be charged with any violent or sexual crime and there is no bail option FULL STOP. You stay in remand until your trial where you cannot go out and commit more crimes. Also, why is it people that are found guilty of crimes are allowed to walk free from the court on bail until some later “sentencing hearing?” I just don’t get why a convicted criminal is allowed to wander free from the court.
when a person is convicted the judge needs to consider various reports and in some situations the convicted person may appeal. While if there is just one person alleging a rape it might be held that an appeal perhaps taking a year or more should not allow the accused/convicted person to rot in prison if in the end the court overturn the conviction, as too often false accusations have been made, I view that when it comes to murder issues no bail should be allowed. However, those committing perjury to cause a wrongful conviction should be punished, as too often they get away with it. That is the problem. However, I view that when there is an actual siege then not the criminal(s) but the hostages safety must be paramount, even if this means killing the criminal(s) at the earliest opportunity. Waiting until a hostage is harmed or even killed to me cannot be justified.
I agree there are too many so called witnesses committing perjury & a stop is needed…I have a clear cut case of this perjury,,,nothing but corruption in the police force & Judges & higher up…..
Seems to me that “truth” is only a word to a good many who fail to take responsibility for their actions, and that doesn’t apply only to the criminal element of society. Where is “honour” in some of the legal profession – it used to be really important, but it seems to have gone MIA!
It is always the PROCESS that protects the corrupt. If they can tick a box and say they have followed due process, they are protected. Whether it is correct or not seems to be completely immaterial. How many times have we witnessed over and over and over again, the guilty state they were simply following the process!
Undo that protection and you might just get the corrupt bastards who abuse the system.
There is a menacing similarity between the evolution of this tragedy and the bureaucratic technique of gagging mention of dangerous defects in government agencies.
As a senior surgeon, I once reported highly dangerous medical procedures in a major state hospital. I was quickly sacked for “loss of confidence” by those I had reported.
A special referee and a Supreme Court could NOT find fault in me. I have NEVER been interviewed by any state authority and my letters are repeatedly bypassed.
Mr Baird perpetuates that situation 30 years later.
How will he investigate the officers who allowed the Martin Place catastrophe to happen?
The judiciary is highly responsible for this tragedy. We definitely need a Royal Commission into judicial corruption to protect the public.
Dr John, I wish you write a book about your case. There are too many innocent people abused by our irresponsible government. How much longer are we to accept that?
An excellent post. Don’t expect Baird or any other senior politician to do an honest investigation of top cops. When another close-to-top cop says he doesn’t care what people are saying about the deliberate mis-management of the siege, it says we cannot expect any protection against these murders, political correctness demands the gunman kills an Australian before the police can open fire. Mr Top Cop comes across as just another paid off public servant with no principles at all. The carpet pilots know they are safe, no matter what they do and idiot John Howard just had to say we should tighten up the gun laws.
Dr John, unfortunately you are just another innocent victim of a very corrupt system that has wide tentacles. It reaches into part of our society and like a cancer should be cut out.
How to keep Australia safe from terrorism, harmful invaders and miscreants outside our boundaries who would enter and take over everyone and everything.
Spend billions of dollars on attack ‘planes, warships and armed forces to protect Australia.
There are criminals who create terror within our country, on remand, who apply for bail which is granted, and when we ask why, the answer is, “Our remand centres and prisons are full beyond capacity.”
Our governments can spend billions of dollars on one aspect of defence, and in the other aspect they can’t (won’t) build more prisons, but I would imagine the government response to be, ” We don’t have easily accessible places to build them.”
I too experienced the same when i reported a medical practitioner for professional misconduct, his lawyers and a government regulatory body desperately attempting to avoid exposure to “protect their own” and gage me using every imaginable discrediting tactic possible. This government only serves itself in the falsehood of “protecting the public”.This will be the same their will be no real truths only political gain. These lawyers also come under fire, who do they think they are fooling, they are just as accountable if not more for this mans bail. The whole siege will be used and reused for a political platform for Abbott.
“The whole siege will be used and reused for a political platform for Abbott.”
Or by Abbott for others we don’t get to see.
Bail review call for Amirah Droudis, partner of Sydney siege gunman Man Haron Monis
NSW Attorney-General Brad Hazzard has asked for an immediate review of the decision to grant bail to the Sydney siege gunman’s partner, who is facing a charge of murder.
Amirah Droudis, 35, was charged in November last year with murdering Noleen Hayson Pal, Man Haron Monis’ ex-wife, who had been stabbed repeatedly and then set alight in the stairwell of her Werrington home in April last year.
Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/bail-review-call-for-amirah-droudis-partner-of-sydney-siege-gunman-man-haron-monis-20141217-129gp7.html
I repeat the famlies should receive massive compensation, and the victims should be given a state funeral.
I think the family of the victims have every right to receive massive compension for their loss. There is something chillingly wrong with the system.
How many more like this madman have we let in?
Sara Hanson Young will you weep for the famlies?
@Outraged – fanatics don’t weep! Those black eyes are focused only on the amount of damage to be done! That particular woman is NOT a caring person!
Quote:-“NSW Attorney-General Brad Hazzard has asked for an immediate review of the decision to grant bail to the Sydney siege gunman’s partner, who is facing a charge of murder.”
There it is, black and white, Hazzard asking for a REVIEW, how god-damned pathetic, I would expect, on behalf of the rest of honourable Australians, he would dictate that she is to remain in a locked cell until the day of her trial.
The only questions that need asking are: how did someone like this, with his history, his active, attention-seeking, overdone “Islamic” exhibitionism, his extremist, violent and vulgar nature already well known to Police AND security orgs (and the Iranians) manage to waltz into a cafe opposite Channel 7 with a bloody great gun during working hours on a Monday morning with nobody noticing? Not ASIS/ASIO. not the Feds, not the Copper on the beat….nobody, Nada, zip. In this post 911 world where evermore surveillance powers are granted routinely without reference to the people, this still happened…(right on Kerry Stokes’s doorstep no less as though it was made for TV). Is anyone else smelling the stench of the “false-flag” here? If no heads roll (and I’ll bet they don’t), then I’m forced to an unpalatable conclusion and I’m prepared to say it. This was possibly permitted to occur. Intel services love useful idiots like this, recruiting them frequently (Finsbury Park Mosque in the UK for example), and there is another expensive, open-ended Middle Eastern adventure to sell to us. You’re looking for a failure in the system here Shane. I’d suggest the system didn’t fail at all, it just didn’t work the way we the people expect it should work. You know enough about Judicial corruption to know that anything is possible.
I know first hand of the internal corruption but Paul be mindful: To discredit you government agencies will attempt labelling you as having a mental disorder, being paranoid and delusional. Then they send you to a “gun for hire” but when you prove beyond a doubt you are not mad just simply telling the truth they “disregard the opinions of others”. Yet like you say this madman with a long recorded history of violence and erratic behaviour freely walks around with a gun, yes something does appear not to add up and what and what does not add up is the networked internal corruption of numerous government agencies, it is almost like they have an indemnity allowing them to harass, victimise and falsely accuse whom ever they see may pose a threat not to the public but to their own public imagine.
Yes Paul I smell a false flag and will be watching with great interest over the coming year as the alternative news community investigates this. I find it implausible given the history of this man that he was not known well to authorities and therefore suggest there is only one conclusion to draw; that being the authorities didn’t want him returned to Iran or incarcerated. Of course courtesy of Shane we are well schooled as to how corrupt our judges are so the fact that bail was granted is of no surprise should there be substance to a false flag scenario. Coincidentally the incident happens right on queue as Australia once again starts escalating its military presence in the middle east and anti-terror laws (read anti civil liberty laws) are debated in parliament.
Paul, look into the person who made the 000 call from the cafe if such things interest you.
Kirkconnel, Parramatta gaols closed. Inmates doubling up in cells. Gaoled inmate numbers being doubled to save money. Prison Officer numbers being reduced and casual staff being employed on a need basis.
It all points to the Bean Counters saving a few dollars in the prison system. So do the judgers and magistrates get the message to keep the numbers down to prevent over crowding? Or is it a case that judgers and magistrates have lost touch with society and are wondering off in the woods on their own?
Brad-Hazzard can call for as many inquires as he likes but the answer will always come back to a system which has been tampered with by incompetent Drongos. They got away with it for a while, but the inevitable was always going to happen. One or two lunatics would drop through the cracks and it has happened.
The Toffs are now witch hunting to hang the blame on some one else. When it is the responsibility of the sitting Government to insure that the laws are enforced as directed and mandated. The Bail Act is not, I will say it again, IS NOT TO BLAME. If a Judge is too weak-kneed to enforce the Act it is time for their retirement.
If the Government is directing the system to cut costs in ways which puts the public at risk, then the ministers responsible should go.
But I write from Utopia, the real fault lies with that new young recruit who just joined the public service yesterday.
There for, No, person is or will be held responsible for the failure of a defective Government System which failed it citizens. . Even though this type of thing never happened 30 or 40 years ago, when criminals were held in gaol because they were a threat to society.
I live in a world where I believe that if a Policeman/woman says “No Bail!!” then that is it. The prisoner is a Police Prisoner for a legal reason. Not a Prisoner of the court, but a Prisoner of the Crown and it’s representative A Police Man or Woman.
The Prisoner should not be able to apply for Bail from a Court until that court has taken responsibility for the trial of that prisoner.
this review will achieve nothing other than creating more bogus “terrorism” laws to spy on and silence “dissenters” like readers of KCOA. there is sooooooo much more to this story than the corrupted media or our corrupted politicians will ever tell you. when you look at this event in detail as well as others (that is, to research OUTSIDE the controlled news) and then analyze and think for yourself, you discover that not only are crucial details omitted but they outright lie to us. we so easily look at eg china and say that they are brainwashed, but few dare to investigate whether we are subjected to the same thing. look and learn… your world as you know it may just be turned upside down.
The sheeple will continue to believe everything told to them by politicians and every aspect of the media, how many sheeple know the truth behind the 911 massacre, they do, the media told them.
The current affray should be labelled The Lindt Conspiracy.
May be as tad harsh but my 2c worth, the fix has been on from the start and this will end up as window dressing campaign to tick the boxes in the least damaging but most politically expedient way like TURC. Finger pointing started from day after. Government, Immigration, Police & Judiciary all trying to shift blame and a massive smoke screen through the media with select leaks to spin a narrative. IMO the whole operation was botched from the time they didn’t hand over to TAG-East. From people I know in CT circles have heard of great unease (I am being diplomatic here to the language I have heard) at the ego driven pig headness from the Police to retain control of the incident and downplay Terrorism. Won’t even start on the sniveling PC way this was handled from the Commissioner, his assistant the Australian Political establishment, enough blogs on that already.The bar association, ex judges, and assortment of thin skinned legal professionals who think they are above scrutiny; as expected, instantly have leapt to the defence of their own, this alone tells me the whole thing will be white washed. Especially if it is their own doing the inquiry. Don’t know if say an Independent legal team from a similar Commonwealth country could give any investigation that arms length but like handing over to TAG-East that would invovle some humility. Natch I’m dreaming….
If the enquiry it conducted internally it will be manipulated. This is an example of how the manipulation occurs. The Productivity Commission has finalized its report on Access to Justice. This is a section from volume one of the report.
REF VOLUME 1 PG 226
The Ombudsman found poor practices including delay, poor handling of minor matters, poor investigatory techniques, denial of procedural fairness, inadequate documentation explaining decisions and a low number of substantive prosecutions. The Ombudsman made 28 recommendations to improve processes and the Commissioner has reported that these have since been adopted. One example was the introduction of a Rapid Resolution Team in 2010 to expeditiously handle straightforward service matters (McGarvie 2012). While the Commission sought access to this confidential Ombudsman report from the Legal Services Commission, it was instead only provided with the Legal Services Commission’s response to the recommendations. As such the Commission has not been able to independently verify whether the improvements have adequately addressed the underlying concerns raised by the Ombudsman.
Now if the legal profession had complied with the Trade Practices act of 1974 which gave consumers consumer rights they would have done what everybody else did and incorporated the new technology of adapting quality control systems to their processes. This has been done by every other organisation so as to minimise consumer complaints. It also means that everyone involved in the quality process tries to achieve a better outcome for consumers. Quality systems turn on red lights and demand action. In the matter of Man Haron Monis’ where their were more red lights than a fleet of ambulances no action was taken. Unfortunately our legal system that includes our criminal justice system is reactive instead of being proactive in other words we fix the fence only when the horse has bolted. Demanding that the legal profession comply with their obligations under consumer law will fix the problem. Unfortunately if this occurs it will create an immense problem for the legal fraternity as they will have to admit to their failings under Australian Consumer Law and will be held liable for that failing by Australian Consumers. This in turn will bankrupt their organisations which is the reason we have a fight on our hands, a fight which by the way we as the citizens of this nation must win so as to avert any more international embarrassment and to prevent the continuation of the wealth extraction process that is currently being perpetuated by the establishment aided and abetted by the legal profession..
I have seen this in my local courthouse. Big time drug dealers selling hard drugs let off with less than a slap on the wrist, whilst some minor offences they are treated worse than war criminals as the ‘big fines’ system the court entails is only about raising money rather than proving right or wrong true severity of charges in relation to community danger and some laws are interpreted for those who have the money/influence while the working Joe and Jane to even pensioners are hard done by. The community is in has high unemployment, domestic violence issues, serious sexual offences and drug crime and its seems to be a revolving door now. Watching the cases go though was better than comedy on any television show except it wasn’t a funny comedy albeit a tragic one of how corruption can consume a whole society and trigger a moral collapse not seen since the Roman Empire expired and collapsed on itself.
Hello Hank
What you have written is so true. The Melbourne Magistrates Court needs to be renamed The Temple of Doom. The judicial system has been corrupted so as it will self perpetuate by allowing dis-functionality to continue to infect our communities which in turn provides more revenue for the legal profession at the expense of the every day Australian Family.