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.