o sung wu,

"....at the Coroners Court (and yes, even the 'sudden' death of a PM 'MUST' be subject to a Coronial Inquiry) "

Not necessarily so, there has never been a Coronial Inquiry into the massacre at Port Arthur and not likely to be one either.
If it can be skipped for the violent deaths of 35 people then one PM could be ignored, if it was politically expedient.

Hi there IS MISE...

You're quite correct with Port Arthur. And yes technically the AG or Minister for Justice can dispense with a Coroners Inquiry. But to be perfectly honest with you, I'm not entirely sure of the circumstances where such an Inquiry can be dispensed with? Can you recall if the Harold HOLT disappearance had a properly convened Coroner's hearing, for sure I can't?

Cheers for correcting my error.

What should one be taking from the vague claim in hindsight that out of all of the highly charged controversial things that John Winston Howard did, his appearance before the ordinary public, where he later was forced to admit he was as safe as houses, was the single, UNIQUE, occasion he was to wear a flak jacket. A visible ill-fitting vest that made him look like a turtle in fear of its life.

If the risk was so credible, so dire, so imminent, what the hell would the claimed 'security', his special security, his body guard, be doing letting him stand there on a public podium anyhow?

No swoops, searches, by police reported and no persons detained as 'credible risks'.

The main two who had had a lot to say about it and return to re-write history, are Howard and his very effective spinmeister. That latter says he encouraged Howard to wear it, a wordsmith who paints quite a picture of vague threat, but no evidence, no facts, just talk, And Howard, who relished the 'courageous' image but wants to recover some the voters he lost forever for the LNP.

The flak jacket was likely a prop. And the photos are still dragged out by 'gun control'.

Howard is seen through forever as the ruthless self-buffing politician who would never admit he wasted over a billion dollars of Medicare funds, money forcibly extracted from ordinary workers and the public who trusted and expected better of him.

However the ill-fitting flak jacket would have served Howard's purpose, which was to scapegoat thousands of abiding, ordinary licensed citizens as some being responsible for the Port Arthur tragedy. The flak jacket, iconic of the 'brave' Howard, what BS! He later became the 'Little deputy' of a US President and strangely, suddenly became the enthusiastic spruiker for Australia becoming the US's and world's nuke waste dump, after being feted by the US State Department.

Feet of clay and always the wedge-driving politician. If JWH's 'gun control' is so good, how come this is now common?
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-21/canberra-nomads-bikie-found-with-guns-trench-knife-explosives/8732658

Should be, "However the ill-fitting flak jacket would have served Howard's purpose, which was to scapegoat thousands of abiding, ordinary licensed citizens as someHOW being responsible for the Port Arthur tragedy"

To quote Issy from another thread; " the former secretary of one club to which I (Issy) belong is one; he's no longer with us as he made a bit of a balls up (singular) and is now a guest of the State" A GUEST OF THE STATE!

A criminal was running your local 'Burgers, Banners and Bullets' franchise, I can hardly believe it! I am appalled Issy, simply appalled, nah! mortified with that revelation of your's. Such an admission is shocking in the extreme.

Couldn't let that on slip by without comment. Have a nice day me old comrade.

Hi LEOJ...

I'm really not sure how many times you need to be told my friend. It's not up to the Principal as to what measures are to be taken to preserve his/her safety; that's a matter entirely up to his/her protection detail.

However, what is at the sole discretion, and therefore the decision of the Prime Minister, is whether or not he'll actually appear at that particular venue. That is to say, the PM decides if he attends. And it's his protection detail as to what measures that need to be taken, to protect him thereat. If the Risk Assessment proves to be so great, it's almost definite - it still remains the sole discretion of the PM...end of story.

Regrettably you don't seem to have any appreciation of the clear delineation between the various strata within police e.g., the component Special Branch has to play juxtaposed with the VIPP Branch, and the Department of Prime Minister & Cabinet. Like John HOWARD or not, he was the PM, as such when he moves, many others have to move in concert with him? I've had some minimum experience in these matters. George BUSH Snr visit to Australia; Several visiting members of the Royal Family; Malcolm FRASER, Bob HAWKE, Paul KEATING, & John HOWARD as well as several other VIPP's who's details completly escape me? I really can't make it any clearly for you, ol' man!