Continued from Police Bashings – Part 2
THE MATTHEW BUTCHER INCIDENT
The plethora of incidents involving police beating suspects or criminals is undoubtedly a defining factor behind some members of the public retaliating in response to police thuggery. Many of the incidents are simply cases of self-defence, where members of the public only assault the police in an attempt to stop the police officers after they have already started assaulting members of the public.
One particular high profile case of self-defence occurred in Western Australia, where police thug Con. Matthew Butcher was attacked after he had shot Robert McLeod with a taser gun. Rushing to the defence of his father, Barry McLeod head-butted Butcher and he fell over and hit the pavement. The injuries were serious and even today, Butcher remains paralysed down the left side. The incident caused outrage in WA and led to the introduction on mandatory sentencing laws for anyone convicted of assaulting a public officer. It didn’t help matters that Barry McLeod was found not guilty of the assault incident, which prompted a number a highly verbal rallies calling for stricter punishments for those assaulting the police.
But the people at the rallies were only made up of the thug policemen and their families, as well as ill-informed members of the public. The story from the McLeod camp is entirely different from the police version, and even the video of the incident that was released to the public was edited to remove the police thuggery. Robert McLeod and his two sons were walking down the street when they saw a woman being assaulted. They went to her aid and later, Sgt. Blackwood rushed in without asking questions and grabbed Barry McLeod by the neck from behind. Con. Butcher then held his t-shirt over his head while Sgt. Blackwood beat him with his baton. When the other family members attempted to stop the assault, Butcher pulled out his taser gun. That’s when the situation turned ugly.
Con. Butcher was advised not to use his taser on Robert McLeod, since he had a heart condition and would almost certainly die from the shock. He refused to heed the warnings and fired at Robert McLeod, ultimately causing him to have a heart attack. This is when Barry McLeod rushed to his father’s aid to stop Con. Butcher. Fortunately only one of the two barbs hit Robert McLeod’s chest, but even this single barb caused a great deal of damage. He was dead for 12-14 minutes on the roadside while CPR was performed, and later had to be placed in an induced coma in hospital. He has now been left crippled and is unable to return to work. Police thuggery is unacceptable, as are the use of tasers and other assault weapons. When you consider that Con. Butcher was involved in the beatings, refused to listen to warnings about using the taser, and has almost killed a man and left him permanently injured, he certainly deserves what he got. Many may say that being left partially paralysed is not even enough.
It is fair to say that if Con. Butcher had not used his taser, he wouldn’t be paralysed today. The dangers of taser guns are well known, with thousands of deaths occurring from their use. How they were ever made available to police is a mystery, because they are clearly a lethal weapon. A google search for ‘taser deaths’ will reveals 1.75 million search results, which include examples of the murders police commit with the devices, as well as the ongoing campaigns calling for them to be banned.
SAY NO TO MANDATORY SENTENCING
The question at the moment is whether Victoria is going to follow Western Australia’s lead and introduce mandatory sentencing laws. If we examine all of the previously listed evidence, it is clear that a move like this is entirely unnecessary. Most of the incidents involving police being assaulted are incidents of self-defence, with the police receiving the beatings they deserve. There are always incidents such as the assault of Sen-Constable Sangston when he pulled over the vehicle with three occupants, for which he did not deserve to be assaulted. But the current laws are completely sufficient to punish the offenders for that occurrence.
Mandatory sentencing really means punishing people for petty assault incidences, such as when the fifteen year old girl was charged for kicking her shoe at the police officer. It was an extremely light contact, yet the girl would be facing a minimum six months jail if she was an adult and lived in WA. The punishment clearly does not fit the crime in this instance. When you consider that the police are well known for abusing their power and creating crimes that never occurred, many people will be jailed based on these laws for crimes they didn’t really commit. At present, only non-minor assaults result in a jail term, and this is the way it should stay.
Another issue is that police are becoming an untouchable species who are able to get away with any crime they desire. The police force are currently the beneficiaries of special immunity laws, making it impossible to charge them for the majority of the crimes they commit while working. As the above evidence shows, they are well known for lying, yet their evidence in court is believed in preference to evidence from regular folk. For example, if a person is charged with a crime and there is no other evidence apart from a single policeman being a witness, then the person can be found guilty. When it is word against word and the police are believed in preference, it always leads to corruption.
Bashing police is a serious crime and I agree that there should be tough penalties for those who commit the crime, but police bashing members of the public is just as serious, and the penalties for these crimes also need to be made tougher. The police are not punching bags for the public, and the public are not punching bags for police. A recent survey showed that 86% of Victorians want mandatory sentencing, but why don’t we have mandatory sentencing for police who beat up the public? The system currently favours crooked cops, such as the previous example of an officer who kicked a prisoner twice in the head and then tried to destroy the taped evidence. He was not even sent to jail.
OVERHAUL REQUIRED
The legal system needs a complete overhaul to bring more equality to the current laws. The penalties for crimes need to act as a deterrent for the public to stop them assaulting police officers and give them the respect they deserve. But respect needs to be earned, and suitable punishments also need to be put in place to deter police officers from acting outside the law and beating the public when they see fit. The following changes to the law should ensure that Australia becomes a more peaceful place.
- Tougher sentences for all assault charges, regardless of whether they involve police or they are between two members of the public.
- Tougher penalties for lying and perjury, such as when video evidence is later revealed showing that you have committed a crime you denied.
- Police officers should be forced to detail all incident reports with an affidavit under the penalty of perjury. At present they can lie about events and not be punished.
- All weapons of death should be removed from use, such as taser guns, capsicum spray and other chemicals. These have all caused deaths and are currently used as suspect punishment, instead of in life protection situations.
- All current immunity laws should be revoked. If a police officer commits a crime, they should be punished just the same as a normal member of the public.
- A regular citizen’s evidence should hold equal weight to that of a police officer. There should never be convictions in word against word cases, and some other evidence should always be required.
- Scrapping of police commissions and crime quotas. This will prevent police creating false crimes in order to make more money or reach performance quotas.
- Police officer resources should be diverted to give serious crimes preference over ‘ticket crimes’. They also need to be reminded that they are there to serve the people, not rape them with fines.
- There should be no punishments given before a court conviction. Currently arrests are being used excessively, when the majority of crimes could instead be charged through mail service.
- Police checks should only be performed when there are reasonable grounds that an offence is being committed. Public harassment through checking is unacceptable.
- Criminal intent must be evident in all crimes for a prosecution to be successful, especially in petty crimes. Currently someone could accidentally have something fall out of their pocket and be charged with littering.
- People found guilty of creating false stories to have someone charged with a crime they did not commit should receive the same penalty that the innocent party was facing. The present penalties for creating false charges are nothing more than a slap on the wrist, and these crimes need to be deterred with harsh penalties.
