From last week's 'Four Corners' on ABCTV:

<< On a hot Saturday night, just over a year ago, Laverton police arrested Mr Ward for driving under the influence of alcohol. Less than 24 hours later he was dead. He had been transported 400 kilometres in the back of a prison van operated by a private security firm. The air temperature inside his cell was over 47 degrees, and the metal surface reached 56 degrees. >>

http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2009/s2595622.htm

The private security company responsible has now belatedly sacked the two guards who directly caused Mr Ward's death, and the WA DPP is considering whether charges should be laid.

If an animal had died under similar circumstances they certainly would be.

Having watched the program and read some more background on this appalling incident, I think that both the guards and the company that employed them should be charged with manslaughter over Mr Ward's death. What do others think?

Absolutely.
Murder, criminal negligence, willful disregard of duty of care, manslaughter at the very least.

Totally agree, it's a disgusting thought but just imagine if this had been done to a Caucasian, or even a dog, they wouldn't have hesitated.

For once I agree with CJMorgan. This seems to have been a clear case of negligence at least and calculated torture that went too far at worst. The perpetrators should be held to account.

Charges should not only be laid against the driver but also the directors of the company who have control over policy and its implementation.They knew that the aircon was faulty.

it is easy to cast the blame at empolyees..[too easy]...what we need is a process that punishes the ngo that supplied bad equipment..[that didnt even bother repairing a lousy airconditioner

this is what we have when govt privatises out its duty of care..[like nsw rail has let the rails infastructure run down..while selling off the rolling stock..[like docs is now privatised out to ngo's..[we have a huge ngo systems failing..

[the ngo's need to realise a minimal standard's..[not ever less than what govt was charged to observe..[that means their sharholders need to pay more of their proffits..in maintaining the basics]

those workers can only work with the equipment the ngo supplies[..punitive payments must be sought in civil court

[either the ngo's didnt train their employees properly[or the employees were made to work with defective equipment as a condition of their employment

name calling isnt going to fix this cancer of privatisation..[ngo's must be made to acount for their failings..big time..to make sure they get the message/that they have the duty of care

this was murder by multinationalised negligence..[make those..who didnt do their duty..pay]

the poor mugs who actually did the murder had no choice..they followed higher ORDERS..[IF we wish to make the white collar ELITES do the job..they tendered for properly..they must be knowing they will be held to account..

[by claiming to be able to do better..than govt,..they must be seen to do it BETTER..or the for proffit ngo..needs to lose their murderous/fraudulent gain..

its about money for them...make them pay huge money..[where is the pro-bono lawyer suing the ngo?...if no lawyer will do it..then govt MUST.

enough of this private corpe-rat-ization..unaccountable to anyone..[not even the law]..nor..duty of care..[nor civil accountable norms]or common decencies..

[due not alone to the first people...but all the people]..

govt is about serving the common need..via common decencies..when this fails someones feet must be held to the fire..[at the upper MANAGMENT/levels..not the poor ignorant'S..pay aS THEY EARN..working slobs/..hired as scapegoats

Dear CJ,

"Should Criminal Charges Be Laid Over Mr Ward's
Death in Custody?"

Yes. Absolutely!

Plus, there should be a Royal Commission into why
Aboriginal Deaths in Custody are still happening in
WA. Something's not right in that State. John Pat died
in 1983 after being assaulted by the WA police.

What I don't understand is why did a respected Wongai Elder,
like Mr Ward need to be transported between Laverton and
Kalgoorlie (over a four hour drive) in a prison van where
the air-conditioning wasn't working, and where temperatures
inside the van reached over the 40 degree mark. Mr Ward was
arrested and charged with a minor alcohol related offence.
Why couldn't he have been brought up before a Circuit Judge
locally for such a minor offence?

Mr Ward died from heat stroke and burns. He was a 46 year old
man. It's a disgrace - and charges should definitely be
laid against thopse responsible or this sort of behaviour
will continue, as it has to date.

There is no excuse for deaths in custody today!
Had Mr Ward been white - this would never have happened.

Yes. Criminal charges should definitely be laid against the two guards who have now been sacked, and possibly also against the company.

There should have been an uproar at the time it happened. It was a bloody disgrace.

OUG, you seem to be missing one very important detail.
It was the drivers who were on the spot, who didn’t make scheduled stops, who didn’t check on their passengers welfare in obviously dangerous conditions, and who then, having found him in a terrible condition, DIDN’T OPEN THE GATE,BUT KEPT GOING!
They could have put him in the air-conned cab and transported him the rest of the way there, but didn’t.
Yes, the directors et.al. should also be held accountable, agreed, but the creeps in that van did what they did, and also must be held responsible.
I dislike passing the buck, by anyone, and you can’t make excuses for racist so&so’s like that and absolve them of all blame by passing it upwards.

Yes, manslaughter charges would be more than appropriate.

This was a blatant failure in duty of care given the harsh conditins in transporting someone in that heat over a long distance.

What were they thinking? Or not thinking as the case may be.

Maxi

Agreed, those S.O.B.s should be charged with manslaughter no doubt of it. I haven't even wanted to post here because it meant thinking of the suffering of Mr Ward and I find the thought extremely distressing.

However, the buck does not stop at the feet of the 2 men, their employer requires assessment as well.

Why was the air conditioner not working?

Why did the guards not follow procedure?

Why the 4 hour drive at all, for such a minor charge?

Who approved the transportation?

Who authorised that Mr Ward needed to be transported to another location?

Was there more profit to be made by the company by transferring Mr Ward to a larger facility?

Amen to the above posts.

I'd also add that this is what you get when Governments privatise services they really should be doing themselves. There is a role for the private sector, but there are always things that Governments do better and should take responsibility for. As the body responsible for incarcerating the man, the Government, has as it's duty of care, to make sure it doesn't contribute to any bad outcome. In this instance it badly failed.

Once the government officially or unofficially seeks the cheapest tender, they are heading down a slippery slope as there is an unwritten law that you get what you pay for - in this case, a bottom of the barrel service. Combined with the common stereotype of "he's only an Abbo, don't worry about it" etc, events conspired to cause the man's death because the guards couldn't even be bothered to stop and look in on him. The whole situation needs looking at including whether people should be jailed (and transported long distances) for being drunk in their car in the middle of nowhere. What was he going to run into? An anthill?

Why don’t you lay charges yourself CJ Morgan. You are qualified by the Parliament of the Commonwealth under S 13 and 15 F Crimes Act 1914 ( Cth) to prosecute such an offence, and can do so by issuing a Summons out of any court in Australia, using the same form the Police use. The offence is one against S 260 :12 Criminal Code Act 1995 ( Cth) Crime against humanity—imprisonment or other severe deprivation of physical liberty. The penalty is 17 years imprisonment. Look it up. All Statutes cited here are freely accessable on Austlii Document Collections, when searched in Google.

Victoria will file most cases for about $38 dollars, in any Magistrates Court. Once filed it becomes your property, because the Constitution, by s 118 gives full faith and credit throughout the Commonwealth, to S 122 Fines Act 1996 ( New South Wales). That provides an incentive for you to find and prosecute such a criminal. You are entitled to half the fine.

The Parliament of the Commonwealth has provided a formula in S 4B Crimes Act 1914 ( Cth), to convert a term of imprisonment to a pecuniary penalty. That is set out, and for an individual, each years imprisonment is converted to $6,600 and for a company to $33,000 for each year prescribed. The offence you complain about, converts by my calculator, to a pecuniary penalty for the drivers of $112,000 and for the company of $561,000. That is what Seventeen years is worth to you, half to you, and half to the Crown in whatever state you reside. I am sure you would like a boost for your super.

Locking these blokes up, is a silly way to go. Better to make it so unprofitable to break the law, that no one would do it and any company doing so is liquidated quickly. Because Directors aid, abet, counsels or procures the commission of the offence, by s 11.2 Criminal Code Act 1995 ( Cth), and are taken to have committed the offence as well, they would each be up for $112,000 each as well

Frackers, I did say that, we agree, and with Robp too.

Yes charge them charge the firm and ban it forever from such contracts.
OUG did you give any thought to your post?
Old warn out vans air conditioners not working.
a death sentence for drink driving?
Would any of us not check his welfare at least once?
Not manslaughter murder should be the charge.

I agree charges should be laid But I think the private 'security' company should not be overlooked their crime was inappropriate vehicles for the job in that environment and appalling supervision/training.

I also believe there should be rockets all round for the contract being awarded without due foresee-able terms.

and my local member because I don't like him. (well alright perhaps the last one is a bit tough) ;-)

Actually, I seem to recall from 4corners that the vehicles were owned by the Government.

CJ if it's as described then at the least manslaughter charges against those directly involved. As for those above them in the heirarchy it would depeend on some investigation of the culture of the organisation. Could the guards reasonably have expected to get support if they had chosen to do things differently?

If it was their choice to carry Mr Ward in those conditions and there was reason to believe that raising the conditions with management would have resulted in action to resole the issue then managers should not be in trouble. If the organisation has a history of ignoring complaints about safety issues and or disciplining staff who complain then charges against the leadership who placed the drivers in the position (and their managers etc if it goes higher) would in my view be warented.

R0bert

I think you are all to emotional about this.

I agree this should not have happened and charges should be laid against all involved, manslaughter perhaps, definately not murder as there was clearly no intent to kill.

Look at all the facts.
1. If the crime was not committed this would not have occurred. Imagine if your child was killed on an outback road by a drunk! Wouldn't you want them off the road just in case?

Deaths in custody will only ever occurr if one is in custody in the first place. Remember that!

2. Yes we are aware the Ac was not working. Who knows, perhaps it is near on impossible to find an AC tech out there.

3. If the employees were actually doing their job properly and not just 'turning up' as is often the case perhaps this tragedy would have been avoided.

4. If we had better state governments in this country perhaps they may well would have been able to fund this service properly. To think we have come through the best growth years of my life and our states are broke is a joke.

I hate privatisation of 'basic services'. All that is cared about is CEO's saleries and shareholders profits.

Finnaly, this was a tragic 'avoidable' accident and many people, including the man himself, played a part in it. Let the courts decide.

Thankfully law courts do not make their jugements bassed on emotion. How anyone can call this murder is a prime example of an 'emotional reaction'.

R0bert,

I agree with your view on the shades of grey that you raise. My guess is that there is also a lack of capacity and backup to do the job properly. The cars cost money to maintain, the guards get tunnel vision driving the same stretch of road through the hot days and it wouldn't exactly be a fun job. So, part of the solution to this problem could be to lighten the load so there is a chance of getting someone at least half decent to do the job of ferrying prisoners.

Another issue is who is going to do the investigating of the case. As was shown in another recent 4 Corners (from memory) investigation of nursing homes, all the relevant Public Service Department did was to check whether the nursing home's policy and paperwork was in order. Forget whether or not the policy was actually carried out on the ground (which was the actual complaint), but make sure they can give the policy an elephant stamp. At the very least, the public service needs an almighty shake-up with the forced retirement of ineffective senior management the first in the gun sights.

straight up act of genocide
late of a long line
would never ever have happened
if uncle's escort was his own kind.

This is a case where the local member of Parliament in the Parliament of the Commonwealth should take a matter of privilege to the Parliament. On another post I suggested that MPs be paid at least double what they are now, because in fact they should be members of the Highest Court in Australia. The High Court of Parliament should pay its members at least the same as they pay a Federal Court Judge, for an ordinary member, and the same as a High Court Judge for a Minister.

At Present Members of Parliament make majority decisions, and then rely on public servants to carry out their orders. Instead they should accept complaints about their legislation, or under it, and deal with contempt on a regular basis. The case of Mr Ward’s death in custody is a clear case of contempt of the laws made by the Parliament of the Commonwealth that are designed to protect everyone from this kind of official abuse.

Here is what the High Court said in a Transcript on 7th December 1996. This is the “Kable Principle”.
SIR MAURICE: Your Honour, it is not really. It is clearly the assumption of the Constitution that there will be courts of a State. Now, it may be only one but what it talks about are such other courts as it invests and 77, as your Honour will remember, says "any court of a State". So obviously, the Constitution speaks to the then existing situation. There is nothing surprising about it. It could hardly speak, perhaps, to any other, although it envisages the continuance of that situation. What one is talking about here, with great respect, are institutions of government and traditionally, whether it is in England or the States, there is a separation of powers. There is no doubt about that. It is absurd, as well as wrong, to say that the Parliament is a court; it is not a court.
McHUGH J: It is said frequently, "High Court of Parliament punishes for contempt". The House of Commons is referred to as the High Court of Parliament

Here are some extracts from a transcript, of a case in the High Court on the 7th and 8th December 1995, while Paul Keating was still in power. The case is Kable V Director of Public Prosecutions, and Kable won it. To understand where I am coming from, in saying that the Parliament of the Commonwealth should accept applications for the citation of contempt, against any individual who infringes rights legislated by the Parliament of the Commonwealth, they are worth reading.
SIR MAURICE: The Parliament of New South Wales is not a court and never has been. It is a subordinate legislature.
McHUGH J: I am not sure that that is an accepted constitution of ( proposition, are) you, Sir Maurice.
McHUGH J: What about when the federal Parliament commits Fitzpatrick and Brown to prison? What do they actually do?
SIR MAURICE: Yes, but that is deriving - - -
McHUGH J: Are not they acting as a court?
DAWSON J: That what you are saying is, that a court is not a court, at least within the meaning of Chapter III, unless in the exercise of its functions, the separation of powers is observed.
GAUDRON J: But does not the federal Constitution mandate that, at least, that its constituent parts be recognised, or at least have courts recognisable as such operating under the rule of law and acting judicially?
MR GRAHAM: At the State level?
GAUDRON J: Yes.
SIR MAURICE: May it please, your Honours, can I just say something about some of the submissions, relating to the supremacy of the Parliaments of the States, and presumably the supremacy of the Parliament of the Commonwealth. Now, of course, what my learned friends were saying seem to ignore the fact that Australia is a federal State, and so no Parliament is supreme above the Constitution, and what is supreme are the constitutions to which all parliamentary powers are subordinate.

Currently, because the High Court has made Rules, preventing itself from exercising its own original jurisdiction, the Parliament of the Commonwealth should be giving a remedy, under its Rules

This case proves that courts under Ch III Constitution can strike down State and Commonwealth Acts of Parliament, but it also proved that we must, under the Constitution, continue to have courts, and that Courts, constituted by one Judge, both capitalized are as illegal as the one in issue here was illegal. Currently State Legislatures are attempting to make bikie gangs illegal. The same kind of stinkin thinking, that prompted the Kable case is at work again.

I have submitted to Kevin Rudd, that while he permits Judges and Magistrates, like the High Court in 2004, to legislate from the bench, he must permit anyone prejudiced by their unauthorized legislation, to have them cited for contempt in the Parliament of the Commonwealth, removed from office, and stripped of their pensions.

Mr Ward would never have been killed, except for the contempt, shown by Judges and Magistrates for the will of the Parliament of the Commonwealth. He should have been bailed locally by the Sergeant, and still alive today.

Because the Parliament of the Commonwealth is in fact the highest court in the land, it should exercise its supervisory sovereignty, over all Judges and Magistrates, without exception, so the Judges and Magistrates will use due process of law, to enforce the Constitution, against all State and Federal public servants, irrespective of rank or State legislated status.

I am reminded of the song, You gotta no respect, and unless the Parliament of the Commonwealth stands up and is counted, as supreme guardian of civil rights, it cannot expect to be respected by the community it represents. It has made laws, not accepted by Public servants, and it is time either to repeal or enforce them

I was shocked when I heard on the radio that it happened in Australia. I was waiting to find out what country allowed that sort of abuse of human rights to occur and it turned out to be in Australia.

Like Maximillion I also recall it being said that government vehicles were involved. I further recall something said about complaints to the government about their safety and inaction.

Yes I think there should be some sort of liability preferably criminal and preferably manslaughter. I acknowledge the complexity but there must be some way of pinning or apportioning it. At the very least the consequences are so extreme that there is no excuse for the current level of inaction. I have only heard of death on a hot metal surface twice previously. One in an account of the way Christians were disposed of in Rome if the lions didn't finish them off. Another was a torture for spies in China many years ago. In both cases it was intended to be brutal and painful. What a horrible way to go!

Me too.

I can't see how could be construed as anything but criminal negligence. I am also left wondering how many others have been left to stew in the back of vans - the only difference being it didn't kill them.

And to those questioning whether the men or the company are guilty. The men are definitely guilty. They are guilty even if they were told to do this by their superiors. That just changes the crime to contract killing.

As for the company - far more complex. If they had procedure in place that were actively upheld, then they are completely innocent. If they had procedure in place that were actively ignored for the sake of profit, they are criminally negligent. And then there is a whole grey area in the middle where they may not of been aware of the problem, were aware but hopped to ignore it. The only way to find out is a criminal investigation into the company and its executives, which it what must happen.

Hi All,
Whether the drivers are charged with murder or manslaughter of, Mr. Ward needs no debate. They had a “Duty of Care and failed. It would have been hot in the front cabin of the truck; how much hotter was it in the back?
Claiming no choice is not an excuse. They could have insisted a more suitable vehicle be used to transport Mr. Ward and refused unless one was made available. Dismissal threats would provide meat for the media and not good PR for the company.
The company management and board are more culpable for not providing appropriate vehicles for those temperatures.
Where you find the prison service/justice service commercialised, it is not an uncommon complaint. Companies accused of blatant disregard for Social justice. Staff frequently accused of brutality, bullying, and poorly trained.
There are those who argue the prisoner had a choice being drunk and disorderly and or not.
Heavens above! The man was charged with drunken driving and yes, he might have injured someone.
Had it been a Caucasian he might receive a night in the drunk can, fined and let go. Not sent 400km, face prison time, including the trip time. Surely, arrangements could have been made closer to hand.
Excuses, excuses are all I hear from organisations. I do not care whether it is private or government involved, there are no excuses. Call me a “do-gooder” if you like but I believe in a humane justice system.
It has been alleged it was a government vehicle. The question is why was a commercial company using a government vehicle? Hence, it may have not been suitable for the purpose.

Where was the company vehicle, designed and suitable for transporting prisoners?

THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO EXCUSE FOR WHAT HAPPENED AND IF IT HAD HAPPENED TO A CAUCASION, THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN A GREATER OUTCRY.

What has the local MP done on behalf of his/her constituent? I assume possibly little, except running for cover. Why are they
elected if not to work on behalf of the constituents?
Regards
Professori_au

It beggers imagination that a man detained for drink driving could be treated in this fashion by losing his life, duty of care was criminally neglected.
Where those escorting afraid he would escape by stopping the van and giving him air, many years ago i remember an incident when a prison van ran of the road full of prisoners, there would have been at least 10 inmates may be more, that driver and his partner opened the back door and got all those people out of the van on the side of the road.
Not one inmate attempted to escape.
So regarding Mr Wards treatment, serious questions must be addressed.

The point I was attempting to make was that the incident was the culmination of SEVERAL levels of failures, contractual, structural and yes judgemental. Which lead to inhumane treatment. Therefore all participants need to face pay the piper.
That includes the officers involved.
Issues like was there a failure by the company to:

Maintain the vehicle properly
was there a backup plan
Was there clear protocols to address the issues of vehicle or major system failures.
Where was the supervision.

Then there was was the governmental oversight ,sloppy contractual clauses/conditions.

I am uncomfortable with scapegoat-ism i.e. focusing on punishing the guards and that's the end of it.

As stated the root cause was deeper. One can even suspect a culture of disinterest in the individuals as people.

The arguments as “it wouldn't have happened if he hadn't been drunk etc.” are simply dehumanising the individual which leads to a culture of indifference.

I can only commend professor- au for his/her analysis.

The focus on Mr Ward's race does-not help to resolve this issue, they only provoke feelings of 'no, sad things do happen to other Australians, you just won't hear about them on the ABC'. The Royal Commission into Black Deaths in Custody found that indigenous prisoners had a LOWER risk of dying in custody, but few journalists seemed to care. It is about time that many people stopped normalising the experiences of middle-class non-aboriginal Austalians and compared the problems of indigenous Australians to those of a broader cross section of Australian society.
The real issues in this tragic case are the expectations of the contractor, the professionalism of the drivers and the police procedure that required a drink-driver to be driven so far.

I suspect if it happened to a Caucasian there wouldn’t be as much media attention Professor.

The same thing is happening to all races and creeds of children in foster care through the government contracting out the care of children to NGO’s. Sorry, I will take that back to my own thread.

Is there a law or an act where being humane/doing the right thing by another human dominates any work order/direct command by a superior?

Are people in Australia supported to do what is right? Peter?

criminal justice systems
have been actively recruiting indigenous staff for decades
to prevent exactly this same act of genocide.

this is very much an issue of race,
aspersion otherwise perpetuates the genocide.

Thanks to all for the excellent responses. It's heartening to see that we're all apparently revolted by this appalling and needless death.

A couple of people have mentioned one of the factors that was instrumental in Mr Ward's shocking treatment, i.e. that he wasn't bailed the morning after his arrest for a relatively trivial offence. Why was it deemed to necessary to remand this respected community elder in custody, thus necessitating the transportation that killed him?

It's hard to escape the conclusion that this was an example of structural racism, given that this is not the kind of treatment that is generally meted out to non-Aboriginal offenders who are arrested for drink driving. Even if the prison van was of a humane standard and the guards weren't callous bastards, what exactly is achieved by incarcerating people on such charges hundreds of kilometres from their homes prior to their appearance in court? If nothing else, isn't it an extremely expensive practice?

There are also reports of similar treatment of immigration detainees by another private company, in South Australia as I recall. We shouldn't let these commercial enterprises who profit by mistreating human beings get away with it.

The blame for the death of this poor man must fall right back on Bob Menzies, and the seven High Court Justices, who in 1953, established the High Court as a privatised lawyers club, for superannuated barristers. When these seven gave in to a request from Ming the Merciless, to install Order 58 Rule 4 Subrule 3, in the High Court Rules 1953, they signed the death warrants of not just Mr Ward, but thousands like him both black and white throughout the length and breadth of Australia.

Western Australia was the last State to go bad, but they have gradually all gone bad, because the head was cut off the Australian Justice System, when this naked power grab, by the lawyers was allowed to pass unchallenged. That lawyers in Parliament have allowed it to continue, is just a commentary on their general unsuitability for high office. When there was a total act of insubordination, by the seven, in the High Court Rules 2004 where they have deliberately contradicted S 33 High Court of Australia Act 1979 again, not one lawyer in Parliament murmured.

Dictators of both major parties have long chafed under the rule of law, and the Labor Party was probably not unhappy when the High Court was privatized in 1953. When in 1972, led by a lawyer, Labor frightened the living bejasus out of the population for three years, the lawyer at its head had no fear of the High Court. Menzies had nobbled it for his fellow barrister 19 years earlier.

The privatization of the High Court, has led to the privatization of every Court in Australia, and they are the wholly owned subsidiaries of whichever State erected them. They are the death of the Commonwealth. They have allowed each State to claim it is a sovereign in its own right, nine of the mongrels, and each and every member of each and every High Court since 1953, who has allowed this scam, the privatization of the Federal Supreme Court, should be called to account, not in the after life, but here and now.

When that lovely Mr Rudd said sorry to the stolen generation, he should have followed it up with some remedial action. He still has time to do so. The real reason he had to say sorry, and it was a fully justified sorry, was because the Federal Court of Australia has been a private corporation since its inception. The privatization of courts, note the lack of a Capital letter, and the removal of democratic participation in them, except in the Parliaments, was achieved by illegal legislation.

When O’Loughlin J, a Judge in the Federal Court, took seven hundred pages to justify the stolen generation, and deny Lorna Cubillo and Peter Gunner justice, in 2000, an apology was definitely called for. No apology would have been needed for the four years since 1996, that O’Loughlin J took to decide, until 2000, if a jury trial was held, and a verdict given immediately. No apology would have been needed if O’Loughlin J was an honest man. Judges are inherently dishonest.

They have been living in a cloud of dishonesty since they allowed the oxymoron Australia Act 1986 to be accepted as authority for the full privatization of Australian Courts. It is an oxymoron because it both continues and repeals the Australian Constitution. It destroys the Commonwealth, and has allowed the full privatization of all courts, and the destruction of all private property.

The fog of dishonesty has extended, as they ignored their lawyers training, to refuse to recognize that the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights was legitimately enacted in 1986, about six months after the Australia Act 1986 and fully qualified its enactment.

The people who should be indicted and tried for the death of Mr Ward, are the Sergeant of Police at Laverton, and the magistrate who remanded him in custody. So too should the people who have allowed this tyranny to continue for so long. The courts, not the Courts, have the power to call down the wrath of the people on the oppressors. How many more innocents must die by suicide or murder before democracy is restored

Sorry if I missed it in here, but what did the coroner conclude?.

...has anyone BEEN charged?.

If anything, charges should ago against the company. Maybe the employees as well if they did anything against procedure. If they did what their SOP's stated they should do and got fired anyway they should sue the company.

Lot of details missing to try and offer a serious opinion.

there are sufficient details
to level the accusation of genocide.
this was a failure of a duty of care.

StG - I understand that the case has been referred to the WA Director of Public Prosecutions, who hasn't made a decision yet.

The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that there should be a high level inquiry of some sort into this matter, with terms of reference wide enough to include prisoner and detainee transport procedures and facilities by both government and private organisations throughout Australia.

There is evidence that many prisoners and detainees have been routinely mistreated in much the same way as Mr Ward, but because they haven't quite died we haven't heard about them. Last week a corrective services officer from North Queensland reported that he had been disciplined for refusing to transport prisoners under similar conditions to those which killed Mr Ward, and immigration detainees are reported to have been similarly abused by private security guards in South Australia.

The actions of the police officer in charge of Mr Ward's case and those of the JP who refused him bail should also be closely examined. It's not a question of blaming some scapegoats while ignoring others who are culpable in varying degrees - this appears to be a systemic problem that has been allowed to fester throughout detention systems in Australia.

You'd think that after more than two centuries of running prisons in Australia we'd be better at it by now.

Huh....had a comment and it didn't show.

Anyway, just to be boring, I agree with everything you said.

Hi All,

WA Director of Public Prosecutions is looking into the case. I acknowledge that the department should conduct a preliminary investigation. However, if there is any danger of a cover-up then I believe it should be an independent investigation.
I have an impression that a government would be reluctant to admit there are major holes in the system to allow such treatment of indigenous people to be discriminated against.
Is it a culture within the correction system?
How has a commercial company had access to government resources?
Has a special deal been entered into between the government and commercial interest to use government (taxpayer) resources?
Was this shown in the budget papers?
If not, why not?
What is the accountability.
Why has the system not been monitored by the government.
What damage has this treatment and others, done to the reconciliation process?
Why has a respected Elder of the community been singles out to be treated in this manner?
Why has a member of the Australian citizen being discriminated against?
Question! questions! I could go on and on asking many more questions.

One in particular question that requires an answer is, why Australia is a signatory to the International law and Conventions in relation to Social Justice chooses to ignore international law.
When convenient Australia appears to ignore its obligations, in not only respect to indigenous people of Australia but also other immigrants of other nations. I see frequently stated that Australians are racists. What do you mean by Australians? Australian by British ancestry or Australian meaning all who have come from other countries.
Some research I did some years ago, showed me that racism tended to be against the latest race/migrant, i.e. Australians against the English migrants, then the English migrants joined and attacked the next .e.g. Dutch and German, who in turn joined them and attacked the next race that came to Australia and so on it goes. It seems that each migration brings new prejudices.
Regards
Professori_a

you raise many i nteresting questions professor,i think australia is a fraud[maybe the term is constructive fraud..regardless constitutionally it is a colony of great briton...''this act''..[act is the key word]..ie an act of the parliment of great briton...'this act may be cited as the COMMONWEALTH of AUSTALIA constitution.

acts..as you would know are only law for the people claiming thier power under the act..the queen[under the advice of the privey council]may proclaim laws...but as far as i know we dont have a privy council[and reportedly the laws are siogned at the top of the page[by the gov general...im not sure any law has ever been legally endorsed into proper law

thus our courts dont judge under constitutional law..[but under the law of contract]treaties for egsample fall under contract juristiction[but im faily sure no-one has the proper authority to write any treaty into law[without hrh appoval..[in writing]..

but its a messy area,..thus we just pretend the australia act is some form of founding document,..and use the maritime [law of merchant]..law in the court...australia and many other commonwealth colonies are in the samre boat[but the law society is doing nicely out of their law franchise..[and the people are too dumbed down to know any different]

besides australia is a registered corperation..every dept is as well[they all essentially have a buisness name..under which we became slaves to the corperation..[thus subject to corperate acts...it gets complicated]..its one of the reasons you/our names are written in capital letters on legal documents...it signifies us under war powers[legally standing we are all wards of the state]...but as i said it gets complicated

we have tried to explain some of it at the links

http://www.pacificguardian.info/
http://www.worldfreemansociety.org/forum/index.php?sid=903cab1758b64e4578ae04dfcf59578b
http://www.civilrights.org.nz/forum/index.php
http://www.truthmovementaustralia.com.au/

anyhow some great questions[guess that explains why the true sovreign nationals are incarcerated at a rate of 15 times the rest of the population..gotta keep the myth going..[in lue of having a referendum on the issue]..to become a legit country in our own right

Monday night's 4 Corners on the death of 5 people in an immigration vessel in Torres Strait is virtually a carbon copy of what happened to Mr. Ward. Five people died because of the indolence and shoddiness of others in positions of power. Another element was the fact that the vessel was procured on the basis of the minimum bid which, in the opinion of other tenderers, was far too low to build a safe vessel.

Consequently, the better boatbuilders were locked out, while a cheaper vessel with a shoddy welding job carried the day. The boat didn't have a GPS and a properly working radio yet the five were ordered to go out on a very windy day. When the captain called in saying the boat was taking water, people in the office were slack and did not take the issue as seriously as they should have. The search was delayed just long enough so that that the last survivor, who was seen in the water by a spotter plane, drowned by the time the plane had a chance to circle back.

None of the players lost their jobs and the heads of some of the agencies interviewed were essentially passing the buck. The bottom line was that people died due to a lack of duty of care by the Government on a number of fronts but no one was held accountable. This must change.

CJ Morgan
From the moment Mr Ward decided to born as aborigene from this moment he took all responsibilities for his future!
Who is next? Migrant's turn!
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide