The Law Lindt Cafe Siege - Inquest Findings

shellyg

Community Leader
Joined
Dec 27, 2016
Posts
6,059
Likes
8,963
Location
No Surrender
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Moderator #101
If the law was clear then the legal profession wouldn't exist. People may think that laws are black and white but they aren't, they are quite subjective, highly dependent on circumstance and open to interpretation. What you're suggesting should have happened is not possible.
We should accept it's a given that in matters of hostage taking it's acceptable the law's fuzzy? We need to get a High Court Ruling before action can be taken by the police?

Cya, have a nice day.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

HairyO

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Posts
17,564
Likes
18,433
AFL Club
Hawthorn
How about before having an opinion on here you go back and read all the posts where most of your ridiculous questions have already been answered.

How many letters mention ISIS? How many are from guy who's on bail for serious charges, who tried to take over the Channel 7 studios, who's PUBLIC facebook is pro ISIS? #SACKBRANDIS

Cya, have a nice day ranting to yourself.
Yet none of those other things were enough to have him in gaol. But asking a question should have been the trigger.

Prosecute thought crimes, but not actual crimes. Genius at work here.

Talk about a rant...
 

Snake_Baker

L'enfant terrible
Joined
Apr 24, 2013
Posts
40,850
Likes
73,328
Location
inside your head
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
The Unicornia Reactants
Thank you for the "like" Rusty Hawk.

I went to the effort to find and put up hard scientific data and folks waltz by it as if it isn't even there.

Makes we wonder why I bother.
 

shellyg

Community Leader
Joined
Dec 27, 2016
Posts
6,059
Likes
8,963
Location
No Surrender
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Moderator #104
Thank you for the "like" Rusty Hawk.

I went to the effort to find and put up hard scientific data and folks waltz by it as if it isn't even there.

Makes we wonder why I bother.
I would have liked it but I wanted to check out why one sniper was asking for permission to take the shot. Repeatedly I believe.
 
Last edited:

_Swoon

Premium Platinum
Joined
Oct 12, 2015
Posts
3,915
Likes
5,859
Location
live at the Greek
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Dallas Cowboys
We should accept it's a given that in matters of hostage taking it's acceptable the law's fuzzy? We need to get a High Court Ruling before action can be taken by the police?

Cya, have a nice day.
Nice of you to admit you don't know what you're talking about and check out of the conversation. Enjoy being wrong and ignorant.
 

shellyg

Community Leader
Joined
Dec 27, 2016
Posts
6,059
Likes
8,963
Location
No Surrender
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Moderator #108
I am very sorry that I offended your delicate sensibilities by not agreeing with your puerile view on how the legal system ought to work.
Peurile is feigning superiority on a matter by calling another ignorant in response to a point you simply don't like or agree with. If you were not ignorant yourself, you wouldn't do it.
 

RustyHawk

Premium Gold
Joined
Sep 21, 2005
Posts
14,568
Likes
4,215
Location
Under the Southern Star
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Green Bay Packers
That effective management of the siege was hindered by questions of legalities is enough for me to be of the opinion that leadership failed from the very top down, there should have been no questions and the law clear.
Only hindered by about 800 years of common law and 100 years of Statute Law. To lawful kill someone you have to justify your actions. Just because you 'threaten' do something does not justify the taking of that persons life.

No police officer wants to join Vic Pol Leading Snr Con Tim Baker in court for murder in 2015 of Vlado Micetic or Qld Snr Const Thomas Hess who shot and killed a man who pulled a replica gun or Vic Snr Det Cliff Lockwood who was acquitted of the murder of Gary Abdallah in 1989. Just ask Lockwood's partner now uniformed (when I last saw him) Sgt Dermott Avon who gave Lockwood his revolver to shot Abdallah dead. That crap stays with you for the rest of your life. No one would want that.

Anyway the law is never clear otherwise there would not be any lawyers, that part should be clear at least!


We should accept it's a given that in matters of hostage taking it's acceptable the law's fuzzy? We need to get a High Court Ruling before action can be taken by the police?

Cya, have a nice day.
No, but any officer who acts can expect a) coroners enquiry, b) civil legal proceedings any of which may very well lead all the way to the High Court.


This event went on for 989 minutes. Up until the 979th minute, NSW Police had played it correctly. Hostages had escaped, others had remained but unharmed. There was a very good chance most if not all of the hostages could have got out safely. How do we know they got it right till the 979th minute is because of the review 2 and half years later.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, maybe if we can find someone who can turn hindsight into legal foresight and put them in charge, sadly, no such person or thing exists, at this stage.

Finally, your rants are like someone who got all the way to Year 9 at school and dropped out somewhere during Year 10.
 

_Swoon

Premium Platinum
Joined
Oct 12, 2015
Posts
3,915
Likes
5,859
Location
live at the Greek
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Dallas Cowboys
Peurile is feigning superiority on a matter by calling another ignorant in response to a point you simply don't like or agree with. If you were not ignorant yourself, you wouldn't do it.
Me feigning superiority? What a load of ****.

For a moment, get down off your soapbox about how things should be in a perfect world and consider what the NSW Police force actually has to work with. Police are NOT subject to the same, simplistic definitions of self-defense where a reasonable observation that a life is in danger is enough to excuse your actions. Lethal force in the police force is an option of last resort only after all other options have been exhausted and if there's even a slight suspicion that police made a hasty judgement to kill, you can almost guarantee that there will be a lengthy inquest full of **** being thrown by affected parties and worst of all, the media.

Do you remember the Tyler Cassidy shooting? The circumstances of that would have suggested that the Police were well within their rights to shoot somebody who outwardly appeared to be attempting suicide by cop, and yet every inch of that night was passed under a microscope to see what the Police SHOULD have done instead to avoid that outcome. If you or I were in that position then charges wouldn't have even been pressed, yet Police are expected to preserve ALL life.

Before you disagree with that, that's actually a good thing. Can you imagine how on-edge everybody would be if the Police could shoot you if they believed you posed a threat to them? Are you familiar with the shooting of Tamir Rice, and how that could have been avoided by Police taking a more passive approach?

The stuff about Brandis somehow being culpable is so ridiculous I'm not even going to touch it.

Stop living in dreamworld.
 

shellyg

Community Leader
Joined
Dec 27, 2016
Posts
6,059
Likes
8,963
Location
No Surrender
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Moderator #111
Me feigning superiority? What a load of ****.

For a moment, get down off your soapbox about how things should be in a perfect world and consider what the NSW Police force actually has to work with. Police are NOT subject to the same, simplistic definitions of self-defense where a reasonable observation that a life is in danger is enough to excuse your actions. Lethal force in the police force is an option of last resort only after all other options have been exhausted and if there's even a slight suspicion that police made a hasty judgement to kill, you can almost guarantee that there will be a lengthy inquest full of **** being thrown by affected parties and worst of all, the media.

Do you remember the Tyler Cassidy shooting? The circumstances of that would have suggested that the Police were well within their rights to shoot somebody who outwardly appeared to be attempting suicide by cop, and yet every inch of that night was passed under a microscope to see what the Police SHOULD have done instead to avoid that outcome. If you or I were in that position then charges wouldn't have even been pressed, yet Police are expected to preserve ALL life.

Before you disagree with that, that's actually a good thing. Can you imagine how on-edge everybody would be if the Police could shoot you if they believed you posed a threat to them? Are you familiar with the shooting of Tamir Rice, and how that could have been avoided by Police taking a more passive approach?

The stuff about Brandis somehow being culpable is so ridiculous I'm not even going to touch it.

Stop living in dreamworld.
I didn't say Brandis was culpable, I responded to a simple question a page or two back on accountability IF there was to be any and found myself in a position where that's been taken to a whole other level

As to assumptions about my lack of education, it's quite wrong but my words should stand on their own.

Edit: Remove personal information
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Snake_Baker

L'enfant terrible
Joined
Apr 24, 2013
Posts
40,850
Likes
73,328
Location
inside your head
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
The Unicornia Reactants
I would have liked it but I wanted to check out why one sniper was asking for permission to take the shot. Repeatedly I believe.
This is their moment to fulfill their lives training. There are some seriously twisted cookies in these arms security crews.

I have a friend that was training prisoners at Bendigo Prison many years ago when one John Dixon-Jenkins decided to grab 9 hostages. My friend remembers a sniper constantly calling out that he had a head shot and he was disturbed at the zeal displayed by this man. He recalls that it was if the bloke was salivating to get his shot away. Fortunately, the siege de-esacalated and no one was harmed.
 

shellyg

Community Leader
Joined
Dec 27, 2016
Posts
6,059
Likes
8,963
Location
No Surrender
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Moderator #113
This is their moment to fulfill their lives training. There are some seriously twisted cookies in these arms security crews.

I have a friend that was training prisoners at Bendigo Prison many years ago when one John Dixon-Jenkins decided to grab 9 hostages. My friend remembers a sniper constantly calling out that he had a head shot and he was disturbed at the zeal displayed by this man. He recalls that it was if the bloke was salivating to get his shot away. Fortunately, the siege de-esacalated and no one was harmed.
Takes a particular type of character to be a sniper, they give me the jeevies
 

HairyO

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Posts
17,564
Likes
18,433
AFL Club
Hawthorn
At the Attorney General's office, yes it should have been and I'd be saying the same thing if it was Mark Dreyfus or anybody else. What is it about George Brandis being the highest law officer of the land, above all our law and security agencies is it that you don't understand?

He's responsible for the maintenance and improvement of Australia's system of law and justice, its national security and emergency management systems.
I understand planning to kill an ex wife and sexually assaulting dozens of women wasnt enough to have him in gaol.

Yet asking a perfectly legal question should have had him locked up.
 

Snake_Baker

L'enfant terrible
Joined
Apr 24, 2013
Posts
40,850
Likes
73,328
Location
inside your head
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
The Unicornia Reactants
Vic Snr Det Cliff Lockwood who was acquitted of the murder of Gary Abdallah in 1989. Just ask Lockwood's partner now uniformed (when I last saw him) Sgt Dermott Avon who gave Lockwood his revolver to shot Abdallah dead. That crap stays with you for the rest of your life. No one would want that.
This was a straight up knock. Knew the man, know his brothers and others around the story. Even hardened coppers were pissed of about this event. Not Abdallahs murder, but the ham fisted way in which it was achieved by the big dolt Lockwood. It virtually saw to the end of the armed robbery squads murder campaign, and the squad was disbanded.

Lockwood was arrested years later cooking meth in a caravan in the Northern Territory. Apparently he was mentally shot and covered in his own excrement. Couldn't happen to a better dog in my opinion.

Avon was by all reports a decent cop and didn't have a clue what he was getting in to that day, but he obeyed the blue wall of silence, when it came time to tell a story. He's probably fond of breathing.
 

Herne Hill Hammer

Premium Platinum
Joined
Jun 22, 2008
Posts
17,877
Likes
12,586
Location
Cowes
AFL Club
Geelong
err no it isn't just cos you're a cop and this case would not have been an act of self defense to shoot him through a window from a safe hiding place some distance away.
A person may use such force, not disproportionate to the objective as he believes on reasonable grounds to be necessary to prevent the commission, continuance or completion of an indictable offence or to affect or assist in affecting the lawful arrest of a person committing or suspected of committing any offence.

Crimes Act 1958 - Section 462A. Use of force to prevent the commission of an indictable offence.

If police were of the opinion that Monis was likely to shoot someone and that, that threat was imminent or immediate then they would have been absolutely justified in shooting him.

There are all sorts of force options before you use deadly force. That doesn't mean that if the situation warrants it that you can't skip all of the other levels and go straight to deadly force.

Sorry, the above is for Victoria.

NSW seems to be the Crimes Act 1900 - Section 421.
 
Last edited:

Snake_Baker

L'enfant terrible
Joined
Apr 24, 2013
Posts
40,850
Likes
73,328
Location
inside your head
AFL Club
North Melbourne
Other Teams
The Unicornia Reactants
There are all sorts of force options before you use deadly force. That doesn't mean that if the situation warrants it that you can't skip all of the other levels and go straight to deadly force.
It just gets covered up after the fact anyway. You, of all people, should know this.
 

shellyg

Community Leader
Joined
Dec 27, 2016
Posts
6,059
Likes
8,963
Location
No Surrender
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Moderator #119
I understand planning to kill an ex wife and sexually assaulting dozens of women wasnt enough to have him in gaol.

Yet asking a perfectly legal question should have had him locked up.
I think you might be getting a little hysterical, that isn't what I said. Take a bex and have a nice lie down.
 

HairyO

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jul 13, 2015
Posts
17,564
Likes
18,433
AFL Club
Hawthorn
I think you might be getting a little hysterical, that isn't what I said. Take a bex and have a nice lie down.
You want Brandis to resign because his department was asked a question and responded correctly.

Does every letter they get need to be forwarded on to ASIO? I did ask earlier how many of these types of letters they get.
 

shellyg

Community Leader
Joined
Dec 27, 2016
Posts
6,059
Likes
8,963
Location
No Surrender
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Moderator #121
Only hindered by about 800 years of common law and 100 years of Statute Law. To lawful kill someone you have to justify your actions. Just because you 'threaten' do something does not justify the taking of that persons life.

No police officer wants to join Vic Pol Leading Snr Con Tim Baker in court for murder in 2015 of Vlado Micetic or Qld Snr Const Thomas Hess who shot and killed a man who pulled a replica gun or Vic Snr Det Cliff Lockwood who was acquitted of the murder of Gary Abdallah in 1989. Just ask Lockwood's partner now uniformed (when I last saw him) Sgt Dermott Avon who gave Lockwood his revolver to shot Abdallah dead. That crap stays with you for the rest of your life. No one would want that.

Anyway the law is never clear otherwise there would not be any lawyers, that part should be clear at least!




No, but any officer who acts can expect a) coroners enquiry, b) civil legal proceedings any of which may very well lead all the way to the High Court.


This event went on for 989 minutes. Up until the 979th minute, NSW Police had played it correctly. Hostages had escaped, others had remained but unharmed. There was a very good chance most if not all of the hostages could have got out safely. How do we know they got it right till the 979th minute is because of the review 2 and half years later.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, maybe if we can find someone who can turn hindsight into legal foresight and put them in charge, sadly, no such person or thing exists, at this stage.

Finally, your rants are like someone who got all the way to Year 9 at school and dropped out somewhere during Year 10.
Being lectured by a couple of blokes with assumptions so very horribly wrong leads me to ask, not you but myself just one question. Was it misogyny or ignorance?
 
Joined
Feb 24, 2013
Posts
35,325
Likes
28,992
Location
The GoldenBrown Heart of Victoria
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Man Utd Green Bay Melb Storm
Nice of you to admit you don't know what you're talking about and check out of the conversation. Enjoy being wrong and ignorant.
I am very sorry that I offended your delicate sensibilities by not agreeing with your puerile view on how the legal system ought to work.
2 perfect examples of empty rhetoric.

If the law was clear then the legal profession wouldn't exist. People may think that laws are black and white but they aren't, they are quite subjective, highly dependent on circumstance and open to interpretation. What you're suggesting should have happened is not possible.
Nonsense.
 
Last edited:

GTOA

Club Legend
Joined
Oct 24, 2014
Posts
1,377
Likes
1,450
AFL Club
Geelong
Monis being to blame here, goes without saying.....It was the manner & way in which the authorities chose to act & react to the situation, that is up for debate & discussion here.

That really ought to be self-evident.....Innocent People died because of their decisions/indecision.

They died because some maniac walked into the Lindt Cafe and held them hostage. Anything after that wouldn't have happened if not for that one act.
 

GTOA

Club Legend
Joined
Oct 24, 2014
Posts
1,377
Likes
1,450
AFL Club
Geelong
This thread about the Coroners Inquest and findings. Are you suggesting the response to hostage taking shouldn't be examined?

Did the Coroner hold Mo Manis responsible for anything, or is it a witchhunt to condemn everyone else because he doesn't want to look like he is blaming a Muslim.

I would like to see a Coroner's inquest where once, ONCE, he deems that all the authorities did everything they could do, and that they are not responsible for the outcome.

But that doesn't happen, because the media and public want scapegoats (anyone other than the actual person responsible), and want to blame police and politicians, and the Coroner gives the audience what they want.
 
Top Bottom