Train Brothers vs QLD Police

[Bobby]

Whereas from my not inextensive professional experience the very first lie in a Court is always from the Copper
and it is when they swear to tell the truth. They don't.

Really?
Did you ever get a cop charged with perjury for that?

[Aussie]

Whereas from my not inextensive professional experience the very first lie in a Court is always from the Copper
and it is when they swear to tell the truth. They don't.

Really?
Did you ever get a cop charged with perjury for that?

Of course not! It does not work that way.

[Bobby]

Whereas from my not inextensive professional experience the very first lie in a Court is always from the Copper
and it is when they swear to tell the truth. They don't.

Really?
Did you ever get a cop charged with perjury for that?

Of course not! It does not work that way.

Lying under oath is perjury but I suppose it's too hard to prove?

[Aussie]

Whereas from my not inextensive professional experience the very first lie in a Court is always from the Copper
and it is when they swear to tell the truth. They don't.

Really?
Did you ever get a cop charged with perjury for that?

Of course not! It does not work that way.

Lying under oath is perjury but I suppose it's too hard to prove?

Come on Bobby...what Copper is gonna investigate another Copper about lying under oath...FFS! They all will lie when it suits their purpose including even about the most trivial matter if it might expose them to error. They too are human.

[Bobby]

Whereas from my not inextensive professional experience the very first lie in a Court is always from the Copper
and it is when they swear to tell the truth. They don't.

Really?
Did you ever get a cop charged with perjury for that?

Of course not! It does not work that way.

Lying under oath is perjury but I suppose it's too hard to prove?

Come on Bobby...what Copper is gonna investigate another Copper about lying under oath...FFS! They all will lie when it suits their purpose including even about the most trivial matter if it might expose them to error. They too are human.

OK - I don't know the law.

Can a lawyer charge someone with a criminal charge and take them to court?

[Aussie]

Short answer is ....no. There are rare exceptions and even in those cases, the consent of the Attorney General had to be first obtained. (That was the Law when I retired.)

[Bobby]

Short answer is ....no. There are rare exceptions and even in those cases, the consent of the Attorney General had to be first obtained. (That was the Law when I retired.)

OK - I thought otherwise.

I thought a lawyer could charge anyone with even murder if they had enough evidence
to show a judge in a pre-trial hearing.
In that case it's the judge who approves the trial.

[lisa jones]

Whereas from my not inextensive professional experience the very first lie in a Court is always from the Copper
and it is when they swear to tell the truth. They don't.

Really?
Did you ever get a cop charged with perjury for that?

Of course not! It does not work that way.

Lying under oath is perjury but I suppose it's too hard to prove?

Come on Bobby...what Copper is gonna investigate another Copper about lying under oath...FFS! They all will lie when it suits their purpose including even about the most trivial matter if it might expose them to error. They too are human.

Police will pull rank if/when they need to.

Lawyers do the same. Note: Our judges were first lawyers.

Politicians - same BS.

That covers all 3 branches.

(Background Information from Wiki for those who may not know)

Separation of powers

At the heart of the Westminster system is the concept that power is separated between the three branches of government, creating a system of checks and balances. These branches are:

1. The Legislature: the Parliament, which makes the laws

2. The Executive: the Governor, Prime Minister, Premier, ministers, departments and agencies, which are responsible for implementing laws

3. The Judiciary: the courts, which interpret and apply the law.

The separation of powers is considered one of the cornerstones of fair government. In Australia’s Westminster system of parliamentary democracy, the separation is not total because the executive is drawn from and accountable to the Legislature.

[Baronvonrort]

Qld police are asking for more gun laws after this shooting.

Calls to reform gun laws after Queensland cop shooting

Top cops in two Aussie states have called for a complete overhaul of the country’s gun laws after two officers and a civilian were “executed” last week.

Top cops and officials on both sides of the Queensland-NSW border have called for reform to gun laws after two police officers were shot dead in what was later described as a sick ploy to lure authorities to their deaths on a rural Queensland property.
https://www.news.com.au/national/queens ... 14b6545a36

All our gun laws and any new ones wouldn't make any difference as these guns were not legally owned, are the police asking for more gun laws to cover up their stuff up in handling these people?

Cop killer’s alleged illegal truckload of weapons and border breach

A Queensland farmer has revealed the “sketchy” encounter he has with one member of the love triangle killers who shot dead two Qld police officers.

One member of the brotherly love triangle that shot dead two police officers and a civilian on Monday illegally crossed the border into Queensland in a truck stocked with loaded guns and military knives in December last year – and the incident was reported to Queensland Police.

A Queensland farmer, who asked not to be named, said he watched Nathaniel Train break through the partially flooded border gate on the Boongangar Bridge to enter the state, driving a truckload of weaponry just months after his resignation from Walgett Community School.

The Covid-19 border breach was reported to police less than a year before Nathaniel was involved in the deadly standoff that killed two young police officers.

Locals towed Nathaniel’s waterlogged vehicle from floodwaters, before watching as he dumped weapons – including ammunition, hunting gear and at least three firearms – from the car.

“He jumped out of the car and started ditching all the stuff out of the car and throwing it into the creek. I thought, ‘that looks sketchy’,” the farmer said.

Nathaniel abandoned the vehicle, but not before stopping to take more guns, a bow and arrow and military-style knives with him.

The farmer later returned to the spot of the breach to find documents, including some that identified the outlaw as Nathaniel Train and outlined his work history at a NSW school.

He contacted police, fearing the vehicle may have been stolen or the weapons unregistered.

Police collected the remaining weaponry but told the farmer, since the vehicle was not stolen, there was nothing more they could do.

At the time of Monday’s deadly attack, Nathaniel’s 4WD was still on the farmer’s property. Nathaniel’s ex-wife, who lives in NSW, has since asked for it to be returned.

https://www.news.com.au/national/queens ... 07366edcd8

The Police failed to investigate this guy who threw illegal loaded firearms into a creek. No licensed firearm owner would throw registered firearms away like that. When police audit you for compliance they will ask where are your registered guns if you cannot produce them you're in deep shit. You will be charged with fail to prevent the loss or theft of a firearm.
Read this link.
http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/ ... 2/s39.html

Now we have the police asking for more gun laws yet they didn't enforce the gun laws we already have. The sheeple who don't like guns will say yes we need tougher gun laws because of this incident while failing to recognise if the police acted on this border breach where guns were thrown into a creek this guy would have been well known for having illegal guns. Asking for more gun laws is just a deflection to cover up their neglect of duty.

[Bobby]

Good post Baron,
there has been gross incompetence.
They sent 4 green coppers around to an obviously dangerous man.