Queensland police accused of using illegal search warrants

[entheofarm]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/10/21/2397018.htm

 

 

Queensland Police Commissioner Bob Atkinson says he does not want to pre-judge accusations that officers on the Gold Coast have been involved in using illegal search warrants to raid properties.

 

Commissioner Atkinson says the allegations aired last night were the first time he had heard specific claims made against officers in the region.

 

He says they are very serious allegations and anyone with information should come forward to police or the Crime and Misconduct Commission (CMC).

 

He says the matter will be fully investigated, but he has questioned some of the accusations.

 

"If there is an issue on the Gold Coast it would be that the detectives are overworked," he said.

 

"There is a huge volume of work down there with suspect files, so there are some parts of this that just really there is a bit of a disconnect about on the surface."

 

Commissioner Atkinson says if anyone has been a victim of an illegal raid they would receive an apology and the officers involved would be punished.

 

"Whether they'd get any compensation would be another matter, but they would certainly be entitled to claim it," he said.

 

"If that happened at the very least that would be misconduct, it would be very serious.

 

"It could and in all probability it would be a criminal offence.

 

"So it's a terribly, terribly serious claim and I'm really obviously disappointed."

 

He says any whistleblower who comes forward with information will be protected.

 

"Now any police officer who has any information about this has absolutely nothing to fear," he said.

 

"They should come forward - if they're not prepared to do that to the Ethical Standards Command they should go to the CMC.

 

"I encourage them to do that, I want them to do that, we want to get to the bottom of this."

 

Meanwhile, the CMC says it is is monitoring the internal police investigation into the allegations.

 

A CMC spokeswoman says the organisation will review the police report when it is finished to ensure it is satisfied with the outcome and the way the investigation was conducted.

 

 

HAHAHA yeah right, what a load of shit. who the fuck does he think he's kidding?

[thc_acetate]

Haha I think its funny how it not being investigated at other locations aswell like they expect that we'd believe its only localised in the Gold Coast what a load of crap.

[entheofarm]

"Commissioner Atkinson says the allegations aired last night were the first time he had heard specific claims made against officers in the region."

 

 

So does that mean he has heard them from other regions?

 

Overworked? getting dohnuts and coffee sure can take it out of you.

Edited October 21, 2008 by entheofarm

[jabez]

When it comes to drugs they can do whatever they want. Cant remember the details but search warrants are only valid for a short amount of time (few days I think) but when it comes to drug cases even though the date has run out on the warrant they still have a few weeks to raid your property.

 

Until drug users are given some sort of rights it will be impossible to stop the coppers from exploiting there home invasion methods.

[entheofarm]

When it comes to drugs they can do whatever they want. Cant remember the details but search warrants are only valid for a short amount of time (few days I think) but when it comes to drug cases even though the date has run out on the warrant they still have a few weeks to raid your property.

 

Until drug users are given some sort of rights it will be impossible to stop the coppers from exploiting there home invasion methods.

 

Not correct, In Qld it will either be a 72 hour warrant or 7 days, it must state the end date.

 

POLICE POWERS AND RESPONSIBILITIES ACT 2000 (Qld)

Chapter 7

 

But that does not mean the warrant was obtained legally

[bufo marinus]

He said police used justices of the peace, who would not read the grounds before signing, to gain the warrants.

 

PEOPLE, DON'T OVERLOOK THAT FRIGHTENING BIT OF INFORMATION ^^^

 

 

I can tell a story.

Whilst working on a job last year, I was unfortunate enough to get hit on by a female tiler who also happened to be a Justice of the Peace. True.

This bitch, and she was a bitch, told me one day that she quite often signed search warrants for cops in HERVEY BAY.

I felt ill when she was telling me all this as she was as dumb as dog shit and I could not believe that this stupid cow had the power to ruin peoples lives.

I could just imagine her getting all wet as she signed search warrant after search warrant for those big hunky police men

[entheofarm]

ACT ON THE FACTS —

Issuing a Search Warrant under the Drugs Misuse Act

by CJ Crawford, LLB

Chief Superintendent, Queensland Police Service and Member of the Queensland Justices of the Peace Council

 

In the last issue, I talked about issuing a Search Warrant under

s. 679 of the Criminal Code. In this article, I'll discuss issuing a

Search Warrant under s. 18(1) of the Drugs Misuse Act.

Despite recent press reports to the contrary, issuing a Search

Warrant under the Drugs Misuse Act is really no different from

issuing a Search Warrant under the Criminal Code. The basic

rule for Justices is to sort the facts from the conclusions and act

on the facts.

Justices should read the complaint prepared by the police officer

thoroughly and apply the rules listed on Form 6 ‘Notice to

Justice Before Whom a Complaint to Ground a Search Warrant

is to be Shown’ before they exercise their discretion to issue any

kind of search warrant.

When issuing a Warrant, you —

* must make sure there are sufficient facts and circumstances

on which reasonable grounds for suspicion can be based.

* can ask questions to discover why the police officer has come

to the conclusion that there are dangerous drugs on the premises

described in the warrant.

* can act on hearsay information — information from

someone who has not been involved first-hand (but who has got

the information from someone else) — but you must weigh up

this information along with other facts.

* need to record all your questions and the police officer's

answers in writing or by tape-recording. If they are in writing,

the officer should sign it as a true record of proceedings. You

need to do this even if you do not issue a Search Warrant.

* should make sure any attached documents on which the

officer intends you to rely are sworn (or affirmed).

* must complete a Record of Proceedings in accordance with

Form 7 of the Drugs Misuse Regulation.

based, you must refuse the warrant by law. (You can review this

decision when the police officer gives you more information.)

Getting the facts — questions you can ask

You can ask questions concerning the likely truth of the

information and the reasons the police officer believes the

information to be true. Examples include —

On what facts did your informant come to this conclusion?

Do you know how reliable the person who spoke to your informant is?

What other actions have you taken to verify the information?

For more information, refer to your J.P.(Qual.) Manual 2 on the

issue of the Drugs Misuse Act Search Warrant. For further

information, contact the J.P. Branch.

‘An issuing justice MUST ENSURE that

a finding of reasonable grounds is

supported by credible facts and circumstances.’

CROWLEY v. MURPHY (1981) 34 ALR 496

Reasonable grounds

If you are not satisfied that reasonable grounds exist (and they

are not clearly explained on the complaint form), you say the

grounds are insufficient and that you will ask the police officer

questions. The police officer must swear (or affirm) the truth of

the answers given.

* You cannot ask the police officer questions which could

reveal the identity of the informant supplying the information.

* You cannot issue a warrant based on a police officer’s

conclusion.

* You cannot issue a warrant based on a police officer’s sworn

and honestly-held belief.

* If you are NOT satisfied that there are sufficient specific facts

and circumstances on which a reasonable suspicion can be

based, you must refuse the warrant by law. (You can review this

decision when the police officer gives you more information.)

Getting the facts — questions you can ask

You can ask questions concerning the likely truth of the

information and the reasons the police officer believes the

information to be true. Examples include —

On what facts did your informant come to this conclusion?

Do you know how reliable the person who spoke to your informant is?

What other actions have you taken to verify the information?