Yay ronnie! I couldn't have said it better myself.

To my mind, one of the most offensive aspects about the bureaucratic protection of Hurley has been the Crown's simultaneous alacrity in throwing the book at the Palm Islanders who rioted after learning of the manner of Mulrunji's death. NB: there was no riot immediately pursuant to Mulrunji's known demise at the police station - rather, it was the evident brutality which killed him that precipitated the subsequent violent response by a group of Palm Islanders.

Any objective observer of this case at its current stage would have to think that Queensland hasn't changed all that much, at least with respect to Indigenous relations with the police and judiciary, in the last century or so.

On the reported Coroner's evidence, Hurley was reponsible for a man's death - yet he currently faces no charges. On the other hand, Mulrunji's kin and community reacted violently and deplorably when they learnt of the manner of his death.

Property belonging to the State was damaged. Policemen were frightened. They all lived.

Black people have gone to gaol, but the cop whose killing of their kinsman is yet to be charged with anything.

Something is still rotten in the state of Queensland.

With the appointment of Sir Laurence Street to look into the DPP's decision http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200701/s1821673.htm we'll get some genuinely knowledgeable insights into this matter. Hopefully his decision will be accepted, even if he does find that a trial should not proceed.

In the meantime, I think a lot of the anger has been misdirected. The way the police, the police force and the police minister have handled this matter has been appalling. The government's probably quite happy for Leanne Claire to take the stick and divert attention from the fact that despite employment matters requiring a much lower hurdle of proof to be met Hurley, and the incompetents who manage and investigated him, continue in their jobs.

They'd also be happy that no-one is asking how so long after the Deaths in Custody Royal Commission the police are still locking up Aborigines for drunk and disorderly behaviour when that was pinpointed as one of the reasons there were so many aboriginal deaths in custody. The problem of deaths in custody is not that aborigines die at greater rates than other ethnicities when in custody, but that larger numbers of them are arrested in the first place, so they die in absolutely greater numbers.

This issue is much broader than Mulrunji and if it is going to do any good for anyone, I think it should be used as a catalyst to get change in the way that the police do their job. Senior officers ought to be sacked over this.

Well said, GrahamY. A calm and reasonable summation of key issues in this matter, yet written with passion and conviction.

GY, yes it's timely to provide some background to the Royal Commission into Aboriginal deaths in custody as it has great relevance to the political temperature of the room.

This Royal Commission did not have terms of reference or ability to hold anyone accountable for the 99 deaths that occurred.

In fact the report admitted this as a fundamental shortcoming of its powers when it declared in Volume 1 / The Overall Findings - in section 1.2.5. -

“It is not surprising that there was much cynicism about official explanations for the deaths. It is quite clear that this Royal Commission would not have been necessary or at least its Terms of Reference would have been very different--had there been adequate, objective and independent investigations conducted into each of the deaths after they occurred and had those investigations examined not only the cause of death--in the medical sense--and whether there had been foul play but also questions of custodial care and the issue of responsibility in the wider sense.”

This cynicism continues to justifiably exist and more so now that this particular death has resulted in contradictory findings of the DPP Ms Clare (nee Hurley) and the Coroner Ms Clements, both of whom apparently conducted ‘adequate, independent and objective investigations’.

Back in 1989 in Yarrabah I recall them investigating 3 deaths.

2 of these deaths clearly implicated the actions of police. There was unambiguous opinion in the community that these two would never suicide – as it was claimed for all 99.

That anxiety continues to exist in the minds of families and communities.

Burning down a police station is only the tip of the iceburb in terms of a deeper trauma of not ever realising justice.

Couple this with the acceptance of many white Australians of black deaths as 'natural' and inevitable and hey presto you have this
combination of trauman/terror - and institutional and public blindness.

I hope Sir Lorry is up to interrogating those laws and procedures he also cherishes. Or is he just another prodigy from the rum corp?

We'll have to wait and see.

Graham Y, Rainer and FrankGol,
I am agreement with all of your views, and ask this question:

If it is good enough for a Coles check out lady to be monitored all day by security camera's why is it not of paramount importance in troublesome stations like Palm Island just as an example. Tamper proof cameras covering every square centimetre of the police station inside, and for a 6 mtr radius outside would provide the proof of innocence or guilt. The police if innocent could point to the tape as evidence that they were innocent, while relatives of the grieving Dommagee family could point to the tape as evidence of guilt of Hurley. Nobody could argue against this measure because it would provide substantial proof one way or the other.

The real question that Rainier and his cohort should answer is this :

Now that a legal identity from NSW has been appointed to review the case will you accept that no prosecution should occur if that is the finding of the review