Page 296 of 1034

Re: I need to know....

PostPosted: Fri Jan 23, 2015 9:53 pm
by kickinit
dedja wrote:
kickinit wrote:... Is this what you are resulting to now that I've proven (with actual facts) that you are wrong?


Image


thought that would be your answer dedja, like I said the law doesn't lie.

Re: I need to know....

PostPosted: Fri Jan 23, 2015 9:57 pm
by dedja
So when Shahin appeals and then obviously wins the case because the District Court Judge was corrupt, will the police officer be executed as part of his sentence for this horrendous crime?

Re: I need to know....

PostPosted: Fri Jan 23, 2015 10:03 pm
by RB
kickinit wrote:
RB wrote:I mean what did he do? Push him? If so where?


Grab him on the shoulder, forcing him to lose his balance.

And you're satisfied that this doesn't fit into subsection (2), despite the jury, who were present in court and witnessed the giving of evidence and cross-examination, returning a not guilty verdict, and the judge lambasting the trial as a waste of time and public money? Were both the judge and the 12-member jury on the take? Would love to know what goes through your head.

Re: I need to know....

PostPosted: Fri Jan 23, 2015 10:59 pm
by dedja
someone else's turn to rub the lamp ...

Hi mal

Re: I need to know....

PostPosted: Sat Jan 24, 2015 12:01 am
by kickinit
RB wrote:
kickinit wrote:
RB wrote:I mean what did he do? Push him? If so where?


Grab him on the shoulder, forcing him to lose his balance.

And you're satisfied that this doesn't fit into subsection (2), despite the jury, who were present in court and witnessed the giving of evidence and cross-examination, returning a not guilty verdict, and the judge lambasting the trial as a waste of time and public money? Were both the judge and the 12-member jury on the take? Would love to know what goes through your head.


How does it fit into subsection 2? Seriously how long do you think you would last in the city going around and grabbing people? It can't be justified or excused by the law as he had given him permission to do what he was doing. He wasn't being aggressive he wasn't trying to escape, the only thing he was doing was what he was given permission to do so. The judge would of more then been happy as it would mean more days on the golf course then in the court room. The jury could easily already have a disliking to him and could of already made their mind up before it started. Thats why we have seen many cases get overturned in the appeal process. Thats the reason why we have a appeal process. If the judge and the jury got every verdict 100% right there would not be a need for a appeal process.

Re: I need to know....

PostPosted: Sat Jan 24, 2015 12:02 am
by kickinit
dedja wrote:someone else's turn to rub the lamp ...

Hi mal


Seeing as your done now you can answer ukfan questions, you wouldn't want to be seen as someone that hides from something would you.

Re: I need to know....

PostPosted: Sat Jan 24, 2015 12:06 am
by dedja
Jeez, what do you think I am? An octopus?

Can't be expected to manage 2 stupids on the same night.

Re: I need to know....

PostPosted: Sat Jan 24, 2015 10:51 am
by wristwatcher
After reading about only on here and hearing bits and pieces I decided to look into this one and get as much detail I could.

I too have come up with my verdict ; Yasser Shahin is a complete and utter flog sock. Not necessarily for his actions on the day as we all have the ability to crack the brace and bits. More so for the follow on trial and complete waste of time money and resources all seemingly for a mindf@ck on the poor bloke who appeared to be doing his job.

This is coming from someone who has had a cop lie in court to gain a traffic conviction on them (ironically just around the corner from the event albeit some 20 years ago) so I think I have some degree analytical ability in this one. I would still love to hear the actual audio recorded by both parties. The overall tone of the incident and subsequent case is the mr OTR reeks of a$$hole

Re: I need to know....

PostPosted: Sat Jan 24, 2015 10:56 am
by dedja
Poor form from the Advertiser today, haven't covered themselves in glory the past few days.

Re: I need to know....

PostPosted: Sat Jan 24, 2015 4:14 pm
by kickinit
dedja wrote:Poor form from the Advertiser today, haven't covered themselves in glory the past few days.


Whats poor about it? They cut the recording short so the jury wouldn't hear what he had said. Not only that the officer said in court under oath that he didn't know who the Shahins were, yet he gave a pretty good description to his boss.

Re: I need to know....

PostPosted: Sat Jan 24, 2015 6:09 pm
by cracka
wristwatcher wrote:After reading about only on here and hearing bits and pieces I decided to look into this one and get as much detail I could.

I too have come up with my verdict ; Yasser Shahin is a complete and utter flog sock. Not necessarily for his actions on the day as we all have the ability to crack the brace and bits. More so for the follow on trial and complete waste of time money and resources all seemingly for a mindf@ck on the poor bloke who appeared to be doing his job.

This is coming from someone who has had a cop lie in court to gain a traffic conviction on them (ironically just around the corner from the event albeit some 20 years ago) so I think I have some degree analytical ability in this one. I would still love to hear the actual audio recorded by both parties. The overall tone of the incident and subsequent case is the mr OTR reeks of a$$hole

In the words of the great Dennis Denuto "Its the vibe"

Re: I need to know....

PostPosted: Sat Jan 24, 2015 11:40 pm
by wristwatcher
cracka wrote:
wristwatcher wrote:After reading about only on here and hearing bits and pieces I decided to look into this one and get as much detail I could.

I too have come up with my verdict ; Yasser Shahin is a complete and utter flog sock. Not necessarily for his actions on the day as we all have the ability to crack the brace and bits. More so for the follow on trial and complete waste of time money and resources all seemingly for a mindf@ck on the poor bloke who appeared to be doing his job.

This is coming from someone who has had a cop lie in court to gain a traffic conviction on them (ironically just around the corner from the event albeit some 20 years ago) so I think I have some degree analytical ability in this one. I would still love to hear the actual audio recorded by both parties. The overall tone of the incident and subsequent case is the mr OTR reeks of a$$hole

In the words of the great Dennis Denuto "Its the vibe"



Do you mean Like Mabo?

Re: I need to know....

PostPosted: Sun Jan 25, 2015 12:14 pm
by Psyber
wristwatcher wrote:After reading about only on here and hearing bits and pieces I decided to look into this one and get as much detail I could.

I too have come up with my verdict ; Yasser Shahin is a complete and utter flog sock. Not necessarily for his actions on the day as we all have the ability to crack the brace and bits. More so for the follow on trial and complete waste of time money and resources all seemingly for a mindf@ck on the poor bloke who appeared to be doing his job.

This is coming from someone who has had a cop lie in court to gain a traffic conviction on them (ironically just around the corner from the event albeit some 20 years ago) so I think I have some degree analytical ability in this one. I would still love to hear the actual audio recorded by both parties. The overall tone of the incident and subsequent case is the mr OTR reeks of a$$hole

I've been pulled over by the cops a few times over the last 40 years for minor traffic offences and they have never been anything but civil to me.
But then I've never been anything but civil to them too.
Aggression breeds aggression...

I do agree, though, that the one time I went to court over a less minor traffic offence (1987) the version the police prosecutor presented to the court had been, shall we say, "oversimplified" a little and made it appear there had been a "chase" where there had not. My lawyer picked that up and the PP conceded there had been no "chase" when asked to be more specific. My lawyer made sure the details the police had left out were then stated clearly to establish context. (I was not convicted of "Speed Dangerous".)

Re: I need to know....

PostPosted: Sun Jan 25, 2015 12:44 pm
by cracka
wristwatcher wrote:
cracka wrote:
wristwatcher wrote:After reading about only on here and hearing bits and pieces I decided to look into this one and get as much detail I could.

I too have come up with my verdict ; Yasser Shahin is a complete and utter flog sock. Not necessarily for his actions on the day as we all have the ability to crack the brace and bits. More so for the follow on trial and complete waste of time money and resources all seemingly for a mindf@ck on the poor bloke who appeared to be doing his job.

This is coming from someone who has had a cop lie in court to gain a traffic conviction on them (ironically just around the corner from the event albeit some 20 years ago) so I think I have some degree analytical ability in this one. I would still love to hear the actual audio recorded by both parties. The overall tone of the incident and subsequent case is the mr OTR reeks of a$$hole

In the words of the great Dennis Denuto "Its the vibe"



Do you mean Like Mabo?

It's the Constitution, it's Mabo, it's justice, its law, it's the vibe. (greatest Aussie movie ever)

Re: I need to know....

PostPosted: Mon Jan 26, 2015 7:24 pm
by bennymacca
Psyber wrote:
wristwatcher wrote:After reading about only on here and hearing bits and pieces I decided to look into this one and get as much detail I could.

I too have come up with my verdict ; Yasser Shahin is a complete and utter flog sock. Not necessarily for his actions on the day as we all have the ability to crack the brace and bits. More so for the follow on trial and complete waste of time money and resources all seemingly for a mindf@ck on the poor bloke who appeared to be doing his job.

This is coming from someone who has had a cop lie in court to gain a traffic conviction on them (ironically just around the corner from the event albeit some 20 years ago) so I think I have some degree analytical ability in this one. I would still love to hear the actual audio recorded by both parties. The overall tone of the incident and subsequent case is the mr OTR reeks of a$$hole

I've been pulled over by the cops a few times over the last 40 years for minor traffic offences and they have never been anything but civil to me.
But then I've never been anything but civil to them too.
Aggression breeds aggression...

I do agree, though, that the one time I went to court over a less minor traffic offence (1987) the version the police prosecutor presented to the court had been, shall we say, "oversimplified" a little and made it appear there had been a "chase" where there had not. My lawyer picked that up and the PP conceded there had been no "chase" when asked to be more specific. My lawyer made sure the details the police had left out were then stated clearly to establish context. (I was not convicted of "Speed Dangerous".)


yep for sure. if you be a dick to the cops that is the quickest way for them to find things to book you for.

Re: I need to know....

PostPosted: Mon Jan 26, 2015 9:24 pm
by wristwatcher
bennymacca wrote:
Psyber wrote:
wristwatcher wrote:After reading about only on here and hearing bits and pieces I decided to look into this one and get as much detail I could.

I too have come up with my verdict ; Yasser Shahin is a complete and utter flog sock. Not necessarily for his actions on the day as we all have the ability to crack the brace and bits. More so for the follow on trial and complete waste of time money and resources all seemingly for a mindf@ck on the poor bloke who appeared to be doing his job.

This is coming from someone who has had a cop lie in court to gain a traffic conviction on them (ironically just around the corner from the event albeit some 20 years ago) so I think I have some degree analytical ability in this one. I would still love to hear the actual audio recorded by both parties. The overall tone of the incident and subsequent case is the mr OTR reeks of a$$hole

I've been pulled over by the cops a few times over the last 40 years for minor traffic offences and they have never been anything but civil to me.
But then I've never been anything but civil to them too.
Aggression breeds aggression...

I do agree, though, that the one time I went to court over a less minor traffic offence (1987) the version the police prosecutor presented to the court had been, shall we say, "oversimplified" a little and made it appear there had been a "chase" where there had not. My lawyer picked that up and the PP conceded there had been no "chase" when asked to be more specific. My lawyer made sure the details the police had left out were then stated clearly to establish context. (I was not convicted of "Speed Dangerous".)


yep for sure. if you be a dick to the cops that is the quickest way for them to find things to book you for.



Yes as a 19 year old I got pulled over and asked to lift up my bonnet. The cop said " I can smell petrol"... I said " it runs on petrol dickhead!, let's go lift your bonnet up" . This got a hilarious reaction and was a truly magical moment. The defect, fine and demerit points lost didn't end up being quite as funny. You live and learn.

Re: I need to know....

PostPosted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 8:12 am
by Booney
kickinit wrote:
dedja wrote:What world are you from because it's not Earth :lol:

Please provide me with the evidence that supports your assertion that the police office has committed an offence, because the Westminster System doesn't seem to agree with you.


The officer made physical contact with him, which he admits in his voice recording. Below is what SA defines as assault.

(1) A person commits an assault if the person, without the consent of another person (the "victim")—

(a) intentionally applies force (directly or indirectly) to the victim; or

(b) intentionally makes physical contact (directly or indirectly) with the victim, knowing that the victim might reasonably object to the contact in the circumstances (whether or not the victim was at the time aware of the contact); or


See B Dedja, under our law he committed assault. I'm guessing in your twisted brain you probably still think your right. I'm also guessing you think Nick stevens should of been found not guilty.

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/sa/c ... 2/s20.html


While you're a kid, Mum and Dad ( if you're lucky enough to have both ) tell you what to do, when to do it and if you're a good kid, you listen and do it.

When you grow into adult hood the police are, in many respects, like your parents. If they tell you to go and "stand over there and shut the **** up" you really should do as you're told.

Some smug prick with a roller and fat wallet is not excluded from this set of rules and respect.

Re: I need to know....

PostPosted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 10:46 am
by RustyCage
Has anyone heard from Shahin since the court case? I'm worried for him. Hopefully he is seeking counselling to deal with the 'Nam like flashbacks he'd be having on a nightly basis of his brutal beating at the hands of the constabulary. He is Australia's own Rodney King, poor guy

Re: I need to know....

PostPosted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 11:01 am
by Failed Creation
RustyCage wrote:Has anyone heard from Shahin since the court case? I'm worried for him. Hopefully he is seeking counselling to deal with the 'Nam like flashbacks he'd be having on a nightly basis of his brutal beating at the hands of the constabulary. He is Australia's own Rodney King, poor guy


Image

Re: I need to know....

PostPosted: Tue Jan 27, 2015 11:09 am
by Booney
RustyCage wrote:Has anyone heard from Shahin since the court case? I'm worried for him. Hopefully he is seeking counselling to deal with the 'Nam like flashbacks he'd be having on a nightly basis of his brutal beating at the hands of the constabulary. He is Australia's own Rodney King, poor guy


The only interest I have left in the case is to find out why the police officer and police department took out an injunction against the Advertiser to stop them printing a story about the officer.

The Advertiser are in court today seeking to over turn this injunction, I believe.