Monday, July 05, 2010

Why won't police release the CCTV footage?

Last week four men bashed a young man outside a Melbourne nightclub. Two of the suspects have been charged, but two are still at large. Police have CCTV footage which could help identify these men but refuse to release it. Why?

The Herald Sun revealed today not only that the perpetrators were Africans but that police are avoiding publicising crimes involving ethnic minorities:

Police would not release CCTV footage of the attack or details of where it occurred despite some of the perpetrators still being at large late last week.

Sources have told the Herald Sun senior police do not want publicity regarding crimes involving minority (ethnic) groups because it could inflame race debate.

Victoria Police denied this.

If the information is correct it is disturbing as it means that the police are so intent on diverting attention away from crimes committed by African refugees that they're willing to compromise criminal investigations to do so.

The Herald Sun seems to have decided not to cooperate with the cover up. It has revealed that Africans are the suspected perpetrators not only in the bashing mentioned above, but in the one that occurred at Noble Park station on Saturday night (leaving one commuter with a fractured skull and another with a broken jaw) as well as a bashing at Sunshine station last year.

Doesn't the public have a right to know?


  1. ""Doesn't the public have a right to know?""

    Not if it causes them to question the assumptions of the elites.

    In the opinion of these elites people should think what they are told to think.

  2. Alte wrote,

    "Here they are struggling to cover up evidence of police brutality."

    Are you serious? Do you have any evidence for this?

    Your claim that the police are "brutal" sounds a lot like the frequently heard claim that the police racially profile, which Heather MacDonald has debunked numerous times, for example, here:;jsessionid=B9C464690D267B3101159AE6A7157F6C

    I'm tired of baseless accusations against the police force, which often prove to be false. Prove it.

  3. This was a big scandal here.

    Vox Day has been blogging about it, as well.

    There have also been some SWAT-team horror stories in PG county.

    It's not a racial issue at all, rather a totalitarian one. In many of the cases, the police and the victims are of the same race. They say that the police are having trouble finding high-quality candidates for vacancies, because so many have entered the military instead. Also, when they do hire someone, it's often a combat-veteran. In other words, the police are increasingly made up of war-wearing men who are used to killing people.

    The advent of tasers seems to be having an effect, and female police officers are more inclined to use extreme force.

  4. The usually reliable blogger comment system seems to be deleting previously posted comments.

    My apologies to readers who've had a comment deleted - hopefully blogger will fix the problem soon.

  5. Thanks for the links, Alte. I'll have to look into it more closely when I have a minute.

    I'll just say now that there are parts of my city that themselves approximate war zones. Thugs don't seem to be particularly concerned about their "brutality", though they are quick to discern it in the police.

    My sympathy is on the side of the men who are protecting this city and not on the side of those who would destroy it.

  6. Yes, but police derive a lot of their legitimacy from their status as "the good guys". If they are reduced to "the other thugs", then their jobs will merely get more difficult. The thugs, and the people they are protecting from the thugs, often occupy the same neighborhood.

    But really, police are trying to make up for the loss of married men in the neighborhoods. That's an impossible task, which is why their efforts seem increasingly desperate. Totalitarianism stems from anarchy.

    My parents live in a majority-black neighborhood, but it's mostly married, middle-class families. It's one of the safest places in Maryland, and people are outside at night, go joggin through the woods, etc. No police brutality there, because the police don't need to go there in the first place.

  7. That's totally unfair against the police Alte. Any soldier worth his salt isn't used to "killing people" but following strict rules of engagement. Which means he'll use force as required. Police have also strict rules and are accountable to the law. I wouldn't like being spat on or having urine tipped on me and then saying "oh that's part of the job". They're certainly far more than the "other thugs".

    Yes police are very much a fall back when social arrangements break down. I would say though that they are generally much less "totalitarian" hey should be because the left have made the police increasingly cautious, in many instances due to negative press which was rightly or wrongly deserved. It is a fall back that can be quite effective though, eg NY.

    Having said that I've seen a husband thrown in a paddy wagon just on the say so of his wife.

  8. Which means he'll use force as required.

    Theoretically, yes. But I know that there is a reduction in inhibitions associated with having used violence in the past. Desensitization, as it were.

    The training that a soldier receives, and the training that an policeman receives, are different to reflect their different missions.

  9. It appears to me, that "Alte" has inserted a non sequitur in pursuing his own agenda with a U.S. "police-bashing" spree ... all of which, detracts attention from the real issue of this AUSTRALIAN story.

    But, I must counter his point when he says "They say that the police are having trouble finding high-quality candidates for vacancies, because so many have entered the military instead."

    Not true...however, there's a strong probability this factor has strongly affected the quality of recent police recruits over the years.

    Anyhow, Australian police and their western counterparts throughout the world, in addition to the MSM must have an unwritten rule that says "don't let the general public become too aware that some minority racial groups, especially Blacks, commit violent crimes well beyond their proportional rates in white western nations".

    Surprisingly, a British newspaper just recently cited crime figures pertaining to London's crime rate, showing "Black" crime rates well beyond their proportionate resident population and, one that follows a similar pattern in the U.S.

    So, I don't doubt for a moment that Australia follows suit.

  10. Correction: "Alte" has inserted a non sequitur in pursuing her own agenda

    Although I'll take it as a compliment that you assume I'm a man. Men are so wonderfully logical that it can only be considered an honor.

    Affirmative action is definitely a problem, and I alluded to that with the mention of the increase in female cops. I'm against affirmative action, in general.

    My point was that the OT doesn't surprise me a bit, because it's become quite apparent that our US government lies to us on a regular basis. Why should this Australian incident be any different? Are Australian politicians so innately morally superior? It seems not. Just look at how they are handling the current economic situation.

    I think the general modern rule is that we should take anything our government or mainstream media says with a large dose of salt. They have consistently proven themselves to be outright liars, and shameless agenda-pushers.

    Politicians have always pushed an agenda (that's what politics is about), but now the agenda no longer reflects the will of the general populace. That is because they are placing themselves to be popular with the youngest voters, in order to secure their future popularity. The youngest voters trend swarthy, foreign, and socially-liberal.

    In short: I am a sceptic.

  11. Speaking of affirmative action. It obviously knows no bounds. More made-up jobs for women!