G'day there HASBEEN...

As you'd well understand my friend, there's a world of difference between the theory and the practice. Unless you're there, doing the job, speaking to witnesses, accumulating evidence, and the other million an one tasks that befall a detective. One can only rely on theory or hypothesis, speculation, hearsay, conjecture, and all the other stuff, that the 'Saturday night quarterback' relies upon to boost his competency in the eyes of those who he seeks to impress ?

An example of academic interference in matters of custody as an example, was the recent NSW Bail Act fiasco, when the former AG Mr Greg SMITH, amended the Act rendering everybody and his dog, eligible for bail. The current incumbent Brad HAZZARD quickly had to again, re-amend (if such an expression exists?) the Act in order to keep many of these 'hard heads' from obtaining bail ! Greg SMITH, albeit well meaning, went against advice of police and others, and the Martin Place incident was a consequence of that amendment, as this peanut Man MANIS was on bail at the time.

I don't believe Greg SMITH has any moral case to answer, concerning MANIS being on Bail. But, from such errors of judgement, we should all learn, no matter how well intended we may be, we should always take advice from those who know, and who do the job, otherwise such oversights will continue to have unintended consequences. And in this case, tragic.

Jay of Melbourne,

You would be re-writing the findings of independent reports and history if you denied that Pakistani (Kashmir) men targeting white girls for abuse was repeatedly played down for fear of accusations of racism.

Also that the Labour Party was involved.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/11066646/Rotherham-politics-imported-from-Pakistan-fuelled-sex-abuse-cover-up-MP.html

Rotherham: politics ‘imported from Pakistan’ fuelled sex abuse cover-up – MP
Simon Danczuk says unhealthy style of politics obsessed with ‘looking after your own’ fuelled culture of cover-up in child sex abuse cases

An unhealthy brand of politics “imported” from Pakistan is partly to blame for the cover-up of mass child abuse in Rotherham and other British cities, a campaigning MP has claimed.
Simon Danczuk, who helped expose a pattern of grooming of white teenage girls by men from a Pakistani background in Rochdale, where he is the Labour MP, said a culture of intimidation and closing of ranks within parts of the Asian community had mired politics in towns and cities across northern England for years.
He said Asian councillors were under constant pressure from the community to “conform” and other politicians acquiesced for fear of being accused of racism, failing to face up to evidence of abuse as a result.
Last week a scathing inquiry report said there had been a “blatant” failure of leadership from politicians and council officials in Rotherham over the sexual abuse of at least 1,400 children over 16 years.
The Rotherham scandal and a series of cases in towns including Rochdale highlighted how evidence of Pakistani men targeting white girls for abuse was repeatedly played down for fear of accusations of racism..
He said he had personally come under pressure from Asian councillors and members of the community for speaking out as well as being warned by prominent figures in his party.
He pointed to the way in which two Muslim councillors in Rochdale had provided character references for one of the perpetrators of the Rochdale abuse...

He described it as “a looking after your own” within the Asian community which other politicians had accepted.

Ann Cryer, the former MP for Keighley, said she had come under constant pressure from the “politically correct brigade” when she raised the issue."

o sung wu,

I don’t buy this picture you paint of a giant chasm between practice and theory when it comes to criminology and policing. The two are inextricably intertwined, from what I can see. It’s not like we’re talking about string theory versus applied physics here.

You may have the practical experience of having been a cop before, but I think it’s safe to say - going by past discussions - that you know nothing of criminological theory, and very little of how and where it’s applied. As I’ve mentioned once before, many criminologists are former cops, so if the theoretical side of things were really as off-the-mark and unhelpful to practical policing as you imply, then surely one of these former-cop criminologists would tap the others on the shoulder and say, “Look guys, you’ve got it all wrong.” This doesn’t happen, though, because criminologists are not as far removed from the action as you seem to think they are, and nor are they as clueless.

Being one who is actually “on the job” can be as much of a hindrance as it can be useful. How, for example, is a cop, who is dealing with tragedy after tragedy in one particular area, going to be able to objectively and accurately gauge the extent of the problems their dealing?

If you could make good of your implications and share with me something of your experience that suggests that Hasbeen is closer to the mark than I have been, then I would be interested to hear about it. I don’t think you can, though. I think you are just using your experience to stick up for someone you are more politically aligned with; someone you would prefer to appear to be the one who is correct in this discussion, but realise isn't.

By the way, Greg Smith is a politician, not an academic. He’s also one of the last politicians that anyone could accuse of being a Lefty. I don’t think he was acting on the advice of any academics either.

Oh dear A.J. PHILIPS...You do make me feel so tired with your petty bleats of paranoia. As I've said to you previously, I have absolutely no interest in you, your studies, your claims, your personal life, your academic achievements, your friends in the police...nothing, zip ! I find you an immensely tedious and an infinitely boring individual. Moreover, I don't like you. As I indicated to another contributor herein, there are those in life one takes an instant dislike, and you're it my sad little friend.

Should you ever manage to dupe your way, into some oblivious and unwitting policing organisation, I'd feel so very sorry for them. Clearly you're psychologically unfit for service as a sworn member. I did serve both on several recruiting boards, and over eight years (two separate periods) on the Academy instructional staff. But,for the sake of argument, let us suppose you do manage to 'trick' your way in ? I reckon within the first sixty days, the rest of your class will unquestionably 'put the dog' on you, you're such an insufferable and unendurable bore, A.J.PHILIPS.

Wow, o sung wu! I don’t think I’ve ever been spoken to like that in all my life.

<<As I've said to you previously, I have absolutely no interest in you, your studies, your claims, your personal life, your academic achievements, your friends in the police...nothing, zip !>>

Nothing I have said up until this point should suggest that I thought otherwise. But I’m interested in your career, especially when you suggest that the knowledge you’ve acquired from it negates many of my claims.

<<I find you an immensely tedious and an infinitely boring individual. Moreover, I don't like you. As I indicated to another contributor herein, there are those in life one takes an instant dislike, and you're it my sad little friend.>>

Why would you stoop to this? I have been nothing but polite to you. All I can deduce from this is that my comments are on the money and that makes you feel uncomfortable because they contradict a dearly held worldview that you thought was supported by your experience as a cop. So you interpret the discomfort that my contradicting of your worldview creates as a problem on my behalf. But given the fact that your post is probably the harshest thing anyone has ever said to me, I don’t think the problem lies with me. The last enemy I had was when I was 14. I’m the type of person who is able to get along with absolutely anyone - even those I don’t like.

I may be boring, but at least I'm a good person.

<<Clearly you're psychologically unfit for service as a sworn member.>>

I had to do a 5000 word essay on the psychological testing of recruits (you know, the ‘Big Five’ ‘n’ all), so I’m quite an expert on the topic now and would be fascinated to know what you are talking about here. I don’t think even you know yourself, though. This was just meant to be an insult because apparently you’re not a very nice person.

Continued…