fluff,

Kirby wasn't involved. Are you thinking of Street who's integrity I am not questioning? Legal people are like hired guns. What they shoot at doesn't reflect on their integrity.

"It is not the case that Hurley is being found guilty, just charged! due process is being followed..."

No due process wasn't followed. Someone will have their life disrupted for the next year going through a serious criminal trial because the Premier intervened in the normal process.

"A policeman must sometimes be brutal..."
I won't dignify that.

Aka,

"...all Australians have a personal interest..."
Hurley is not some sacrificial lamb for your hate of injustice. He is a human in the criminal law system either guilty or innocent.

"That is not the issue in this case. If this was an issue of 'sufficient force' being used then why the cover up."
You call it a cover up and mates obviously shouldn't investigate mates but don't jump to conclusions or underestimate people's stupidity.

"But poor Mulrunji has no life to enjoy - his life was cut short."
Unless you want to live in continual risk with lynch mob justice we need to assume Hurley is innocent unless there is proof that he is criminally responsible. What if Hurley had died for some reason and Mulrunji was falsely accused and DPP found no evidence but the normal process got sidestepped?

"This issue raises the ongoing concern that some people want justice to remain an illusion for Indigenous Australians."

Selective justice is the problem not the solution. If people don't uphold justice for all there will never be a guarantee of justice for any group.

"The police union, ... appear to be demanding that they are above the law ... does nothing to sway my thoughts."
Don't let the facts get in the way of a good story eh?

"From what I can understand, the police unions stance appears to be a demand for the right to kill, without challenge."
You don't understand that is the problem. They objected when due process was not followed for an Australian.

mjpb: I remember the reports of the video being turned off before he was taken into the watchouse and turned back on later, I also remember the claims he was hit by a car in the 24 hours before he was arrested and that is how he got the injuries, and I also remember the other versions given to account for his serious injuries (like I said it has stunk from day one) and if there is no video of that time frame how can anybody comment on that time.

If it came to believing a representative from the Police union (what was the secret deal done recently with the Police Association and the Bracks Govt to make taxpayers foot the bill for legal costs for Police being charged with corruption in return for the Police backing the Bracks Govt for re-election, I think that says bucket loads in itself) or a highly trained and QUALIFIED Coroner who spent about 2 years of investigation on this matter to reach her conclusion, I would go with the coroner like everybody else has seemed to do.

Basically he is being treated like everybody else would be and Police do not like it!!
Sorry but the truth is just that, The truth!

Times are a changing and Police better get used to it!

Darwin,

Re: Camera. You originally said:

“…turned off just before they entered and turned back on after the human being was deceased.”

That would look highly suspicious and you'd think it would be front page Courier Mail and in the acting coroner's report so I figured you were mistaken.

Where were the reports?

The way you are now saying it it could almost cover any normal situation where noone was in the cells so the cameras were naturally off (videotapes are not made of empty cells) then people were put in the cells and the camera turned on. That would hardly be scandalous or newsworthy.

“ if there is no video of that time frame how can anybody comment on that time.”

Witnesses. A few police and a few civilians were in the vicinity.

Nevertheless, the person who gave the damaging evidence (damaging if the conclusion is reached, as the acting coroner did, that he didn't see what he said he saw but must have been mistaken and really saw something else)(what he said he saw would have caused a black eye not a death) is deceased. Yet somehow there is evidence to convict.

Re: believing a representative of police union or coroner
The police union vs coroner was only with regard to conclusions. I have only heard sketchy reports of it but as far as I can figure it sounds like someone from the Police Union was upset because the coroner did not rely upon evidence in Hurley’s favour including that of a Professor who said that something was possible. The coroner decided that the something was impossible. That wasn’t in Hurley’s favour.

“Basically he is being treated like everybody else would be and Police do not like it!! Sorry but the truth is just that, The truth!”

The DPP make the call as to whether or not someone is charged with serious criminal offences. They made the decision not to charge Hurley. If he was being treated like anyone else it would end there. It did not end there.

mjpb

I remember reports at the time stating that as i have already said.
There were other people in the cells at the time, and funnily enough one person in the cell at the time and was a key witness committed SUICIDE right after being taken for a drive by Police the night before the Judge arrived on the island, how convenient for Police.

And the coroner did not believe the Police evidence due to the changing story of the events, hit by a car explains his injuries etc.

As I said the highly trained coroner if by far more credible than a Police union rep who didn't like the fact that Police were held to be accountable like anybody else would have been under the same circumstances.

So why did the highly trained ex Judge who would have a far better grasp on the law find the total opposite of the DPP, then again the judge was acting totally independently and was not influenced by other matters unlike the DPP. Judge + Coroner vs DPP, 2 to 1 against = prosecution.

Sorry mjpb you can try to sugar coat this matter as much as you want but the truth will speak for itself and it is good to see that proper due process has at last been followed.

No comment about the dodgy deals between Police unions/associations and why Police are getting unlimited legal expenses paid by the taxpayer for their defense of corruption charges, gee I do not think normal people would have unlimited legal expenses at the beck and call if they were charged with a offense, it does appear that Police are treated differently doesn't it?

Times are a changing, Police better get used to the new changes that will be happening.

Darwin,

I don't know where to go with this. I know what Rainier has posted. I know what I have posted. There does not seem much more to say. There is a difference between rumours and reports and the coroner said nothing about being hit by a car. If you can point me toward a publication and time period I am happy to accept your reports.

I haven't questioned the facts that the coroner put forward. Neither did the police union rep. It is what was done with those facts that has been contentious. The police officer wasn't treated the same as everyone else. Do you really think the Premier pays someone to second guess the DPP every time they don't proceed?

"So why did the highly trained ex Judge ...find the total opposite of the DPP?"

Because he is an ex-lawyer and that was his job.

"...the judge was acting totally independently"

We have very different concepts of independent.

"and was not influenced by other matters unlike the DPP."
What other matters?

"Judge + Coroner vs DPP, 2 to 1 against = prosecution."
The coroner doesn't make that type of decision and it would either be unfair to the defendant or limit the coroner inappropriately if things were changed so that they could. The DPP makes the call. Someone hired to second guess them got a different result. That is something different to what you are saying.

I don't know enough about the corruption issue you refer to to comment.

So where is Mirko?