Policeman punished for encouraging woman to flash her breast – by Malaysia Chronicle – 10 August 2011 14:41 A POLICE officer who encouraged a woman to flash her breasts and then got other officers to take photos of him putting handcuffs on her during last year’s Valley Fiesta is appealing a dock in pay. Constable Travis Garth was reprimanded after accepting an invitation to see a woman’s “boob job” while patrolling as part of Operation Unite, the national police crackdown on booze-fuelled violence, an internal police disciplinary report states. The police investigation found he also allowed her to wear a police cap in the photos and didn’t delete them as ordered to by his boss, the Courier-Mail reported. “I find that you participated in a number of photographs being taken with a semi-naked female member of the public and that you were wearing a police uniform, used police issue handcuffs in an inappropriate manner by posing with the handcuffs to give the appearance she was under arrest,” Assistant Commissioner Tony Wright said in his disciplinary decision. “These photographs were stored on your mobile phone and on that of (a colleague’s) mobile telephone. “I find that you showed other police officers the photograph of you standing next to a semi-naked woman exposing her breasts and . . . said you ‘just had the best night ever’.” Mr Wright said in the disciplinary hearing report that “when applying the appropriate standard of proof, the only finding that I can make is misconduct”. He said in the interest of ensuring the confidence of the community in the force, he had to “establish a strong deterrence” to such behaviour. Constable Garth said in his submission to Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT) he received a pay cut of about $55,000 over four years, not including superannuation, overtime or allowances. He argued the penalty was “grossly excessive” and that his peers and supervisors agreed the incident was “out of character”. “I am married with two children and am supporting my family almost on one wage,” he said in the QCAT submission. “With the financial penalty that I will receive, I will not be able to continue my position within the QPS. “I understand that I have caused embarrassment to the QPS and I am extremely remorseful for it. However, I ask for leniency due to my work history and my financial position.” Queensland Police Union president Ian Leavers said it was inappropriate to comment on the case because it was before QCAT. Police sources say Constable Garth was lucky not to have been sacked. – news.com.au
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Breaking ice is not penalty worthy. Laugh it off and forget it or give a warning for 1st offenders at most and punish equitably, which is not really finable but perhaps different assignment away from the public. Australia indulges in fascism keeps the police cold and distant from the public.
Wednesday, Woman paid $26,600 over sperm (this should read semen?) in water – by Malaysia Chronicle – 10 August 2011
A US man convicted of ejaculating into a co-worker’s water bottle has been ordered to pay the woman more than $US27,000 ($26,600). The Los Angeles Times says a judge today ordered Michael Kevin Lallana to pay the woman for loss of wages, therapy and medical expenses. Lallana was convicted earlier this year of two misdemeanour counts of battery. Prosecutors say Lallana deposited his semen twice last year in the water bottle of a co-worker at Northwestern Mutual Mortgage Company in Newport Beach. The woman drank from the bottle both times, throwing the first one away after detecting a foul taste. The second time she sent the bottle to a lab for testing. Lallana was arrested in July 2010 and his DNA was later matched to the water bottle. – couriermail.com.au
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Which taxpayer votes for the woman to drop some of her own stuff into a bottle and have the law make the offender drink it instead of paying 6 years of tax monies to house and feed him as well as destroy the man’s life? As this was done in private, the punishment should equitably be done in private as well so that the offender can get back to their life almost immediately. Remember eye for eye and tooth for tooth? This si how a country becomes bankrupt, enriching the prison contractor/crony system. Vote for an MP who can amend punishments for such offenses.
Man fights local council to keep pet – by Malaysia Chronicle – 10 August 2011 A PET sheep is at the centre of a $60,000 battle between a Melbourne man and his local council. Vu Ho, 54, has taken the fight for his sheep, Baa, all the way to the Supreme Court after Greater Dandenong City Council threatened to remove his beloved pet. If he loses the case on September 7, he faces $30,000 in legal costs plus a similar bill for the council’s lawyers. The Springvale mechanic said Baa had become like a “younger sister or child” to him and he would do whatever it took to keep her. “It started off that I got her as a more civilised way to cut the grass at my workshop,” he said. “But she became a pet, like part of the family. It’s like she’s one of my children. I have to take care of her and look after her welfare.” Mr Ho said he had kept Baa at his workshop and in the backyard of his nearby home for 10 years. But Greater Dandenong City Council local laws officers hit him with a $220 fine on February 25 for “keeping livestock on land under half (a) hectare”. Mr Ho, who came to Australia in 1981 as a Vietnamese refugee, said under the council’s 2005 local law, “livestock” referred to any animal, including cats and dogs. He will argue before the court that all pet owners in the municipality would lose the right to their animals if that section of the law were strictly applied. The council updated the laws late last month, exempting cats and dogs from the term “livestock”. Mr Ho moved Baa to a farm at Cranbourne three months ago while he prepared his challenge. But he said he “could feel” that Baa missed being around him at his workshop, which he also shared with his dog, Chucky. “About two weeks ago I could feel that she was missing me. I felt a warm feeling, it was a connection with my sheep,” he said. Hymans Solicitors, of Dandenong, have taken on Mr Ho’s case but declined to comment yesterday, as did Greater Dandenong City Council. – Herald Sun
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
More fascism by the Australians and a waste of manpower and abuse of citizens. Who even cares if there is an elephant on that property if it doesn’t even cause anyone a single cent? They should be more concerned about animal abuse cases (in this case it is the council abusing the guy by seperating him from his pet). What this proves is a big society/big brother mentality and a desire of the existing governemnt in Australia to interfere in private lives. If we didn’t know better, this is even about white folk (Australians who come from England) oppressing Vietnamese and other Asian communities.
Sacking Of Eight Immigration Officers Does Not Exempt Them From Prosecution For Their Crimes – by William Leong – 9th August 2011
I refer to the report in The Sun on 9th August 2011 on the statement by the Immigration Director-General Alias Ahmad that disciplinary action had been taken and the eight immigration officers detained under the Internal Security Act (“ISA”) had been sacked. The fact that they have been sacked does not exempt them from prosecution for their crimes. I ask the Minister of Home Affairs, Hishammuddin Hussein, to reconsider his decision not to charge the 8 officers in a court of law for the various offences they have committed. The Home Minister said the eight officers had committed serious crimes such as terrorist activities, firearms smuggling, drugs and espionage as well as human trafficking. The Home Minister said the eight were freed because they have shown remorse, repented for their mistakes and have given full cooperation to the authorities to stamp out human trafficking. I call upon the Home Minister to see that the due process of the law is complied and to charge them for the serious crimes he said they had committed. The Home Minister must not act as prosecutor, judge, jury and pardons board to release them because they have shown remorse. If remorse is the criterion for not prosecuting criminals, we will have anarchy. This is because murderers and thieves will be walking around scot free by allowing them to claim they show remorsefulness and are repentant for their crimes. The Minister of Home Affairs must ensure that this is a nation where the Rule of Law applies and not the arbitrary Rule of Men. William Leong Jee Keen is MP of Selayang
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
Don’t be bloodthirsty in demanding so much more. They must be allowed to correct themselves and be allowed to become EX-thieves though EX-murderer’s lives are as forfeit as the victim’s families decide. Murder cannot be revived. Theft is easily repared. In the case of the 8 immigration officers, if they can help in a way equitable to what they have stolen (with interest calculated, if that is even possible), then they should not be further punished. Sacking is already quite severe, they probably have families to raise.
Drug Charge: Woman In Nude Ear Squat Case Goes Free – Bernama – 9 August 2011
PETALING JAYA — The woman linked to the ear squatting-in-the-nude incident was and acquitted and discharged of a drug charge by the Magistrate’s Court here on Monday. Magistrate Nor Afidah Idris ruled that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against Hemy Hamisa Abu Hassan, 28. Hemy’s husband, Kamarul Hamri Mohd Latif, 27, and three others, Azman Mohd Nor, 32, Salman Al Mujahid, 27, and Juan Caesan Mohamad, 32, who were jointly charged with possession of 10.19 grams of syabu at Sekolah Kebangsaan Damansara Jaya 1 & 2, on June 29, 2005 at 1.45am were similarly freed. Counsel Baljit Singh Sidhu defended her while Deputy Public Prosecutor Fatimah Zahra Ramli prosecuted. The mother of three had on Aug 29, 2006 filed a compensation lawsuit naming Mohd Dzulfatah Saari (a constable at the time) who allegedly recorded the ear squat incident, and the government as respondents. She had sought for RM250,000 exemplary damages and other reliefs deemed by the court. The case was settled out of court on July 27 this year.
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
The officers who made the woman squat, should be made to squat in the nude to as many people who saw the woman directly with the media clips seen by as many people as well. But 250K compensation is ridiculous and not equal or just as some would demand that they being indvertent voyeurs be compensated for sickened emotions and defiled eyes. It’s not about money, it’s about equitable punishment. Who knows the nude squat woman’s aurat was destroyed and irreplaceable? A price cannot be placed on chastity but the same can be taken in equal measure from the perpetrators without a single cent involved as this is not about money. Meanwhile media should be responsible enough to not simply leak in a manner that causes the life of the nude squat woman to be ruined.