tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38166289648863256112024-02-18T17:38:39.936-08:00Strike Force EmblemsTIMELINE: Censorship & The Strike Force Emblems AffairUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger19125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3816628964886325611.post-47203086164012823732013-08-26T03:45:00.000-07:002013-08-29T05:16:21.399-07:00<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; font-weight: normal; text-align: justify;">
<span style="font-size: small;">The PIC Inspector’s review of the Listening Devices Warrant scandal, and
his recommendations to not release the Strike Force Emblems report is
both disappointing and completely unsatisfactory. For more information
view our Circular, Minister's Statement and the LETTER from the PIC Inspector.</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKrO5PSXofWM7VNPPLJqKTS0CWVQujBAE5vHarcOAQPb4ZgdHDqJ4hPSxkR7seBWW-36G7QuqbZ5PN7gEBV63nRjinmg8Pk9QGyHG4H_UNGJGu5c1KXwTKqUFEy-yfr8YPkPlZcR_EpPo/s1600/r739080_6028928.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="215" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjKrO5PSXofWM7VNPPLJqKTS0CWVQujBAE5vHarcOAQPb4ZgdHDqJ4hPSxkR7seBWW-36G7QuqbZ5PN7gEBV63nRjinmg8Pk9QGyHG4H_UNGJGu5c1KXwTKqUFEy-yfr8YPkPlZcR_EpPo/s400/r739080_6028928.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://www.pansw.org.au/sites/default/files/public/2012-11-27%20-%20Letter%20from%20Inspector%20of%20PIC%20-%20Strike%20Force%20Emblems.pdf"><u>Letter from the PIC Inspector</u></a>.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNBNCRoBLdVAomA9DOQIrVHXQoFjud_enbuCJatEKwZlJLRWyMOpn2VviY5KcrkkBZpDIyFmue6-4tFc9yK6SQ-sG_zIZwmq__F42xz4mY2a07Z-RVZ7TiIW3ex2G_p2iAuJ8fBfR_XHs/s1600/StrikeForceEmblems.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"> <img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNBNCRoBLdVAomA9DOQIrVHXQoFjud_enbuCJatEKwZlJLRWyMOpn2VviY5KcrkkBZpDIyFmue6-4tFc9yK6SQ-sG_zIZwmq__F42xz4mY2a07Z-RVZ7TiIW3ex2G_p2iAuJ8fBfR_XHs/s1600/StrikeForceEmblems.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<span class="watch-title long-title yt-uix-expander-head" dir="ltr" id="eow-title" style="vertical-align: top;" title="Ombudsman to investigate Strike Force Emblems - Channel 7 News - 6 October 2012"><span style="font-size: small;">Strike Force Emblems</span></span> </div>
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/OSef8rr_e7U" width="420"></iframe><br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/WiXKQyVo4gc" width="420"></iframe></div>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /><iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/NSe9sqCmtkw" width="420"></iframe>
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3816628964886325611.post-76112561595693564282013-06-14T17:50:00.000-07:002013-08-27T18:10:53.325-07:00Inquiry into Performance Measures in Oversight Agencies<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiFYeGe1wJFsqkzeb_9HAWFi6VxSxlUR3Df-BlH1ATgMiOryQ3KxoQwhZAmWgSs7Wxhr8m85vj7DlqckmwgDOWiSBefNEZmuLBczQbT9lWB8lofLveUkyzlbEf-g6eKTUU4bEArVX8q_Ao/s1600/Emblems-InspectorResponse_Page_01.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiFYeGe1wJFsqkzeb_9HAWFi6VxSxlUR3Df-BlH1ATgMiOryQ3KxoQwhZAmWgSs7Wxhr8m85vj7DlqckmwgDOWiSBefNEZmuLBczQbT9lWB8lofLveUkyzlbEf-g6eKTUU4bEArVX8q_Ao/s640/Emblems-InspectorResponse_Page_01.jpg" width="451" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3y0NdBnu5HotZWAE-f5ot-VYBgff1xCNdEWzf3I9hl1UuSdi4VQVVscmr2rgL0PcyhEf16RBgqjBcB8Yu8y9v6xJ3ZPmpOjq4dFEtearvt3xSll7meDLMWZXrQcNxxxDdOPkS9kqlg4M/s1600/Emblems-InspectorResponse_Page_02.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh3y0NdBnu5HotZWAE-f5ot-VYBgff1xCNdEWzf3I9hl1UuSdi4VQVVscmr2rgL0PcyhEf16RBgqjBcB8Yu8y9v6xJ3ZPmpOjq4dFEtearvt3xSll7meDLMWZXrQcNxxxDdOPkS9kqlg4M/s640/Emblems-InspectorResponse_Page_02.jpg" width="452" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEib1OHS-kZf1IbGmf3fI4SXtOQaqMQ3o1fZexVw6cUVItVQ1cnJUyQztjLp32YVWpsdJDuBa8gLeKR1GXCGqidEEexjFisQNIjFK-vYFXbtEnq9e79shqirX__3K-GawKH73d2V_GDm1iI/s1600/Emblems-InspectorResponse_Page_03.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEib1OHS-kZf1IbGmf3fI4SXtOQaqMQ3o1fZexVw6cUVItVQ1cnJUyQztjLp32YVWpsdJDuBa8gLeKR1GXCGqidEEexjFisQNIjFK-vYFXbtEnq9e79shqirX__3K-GawKH73d2V_GDm1iI/s640/Emblems-InspectorResponse_Page_03.jpg" width="452" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7KkA7GsriKnbCN859UqecQadNOi0nGyRzWisj9_UrsP_C3ZIsgSZxoaXA9tUxCgdCqJoqv0VVXO08R6JPXRDFMgO4ArgXXCiuOwe-SKvY_JJVsQ-6EUlpU6HFvGVtGQhyg8s38SkZy9Q/s1600/Emblems-InspectorResponse_Page_04.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj7KkA7GsriKnbCN859UqecQadNOi0nGyRzWisj9_UrsP_C3ZIsgSZxoaXA9tUxCgdCqJoqv0VVXO08R6JPXRDFMgO4ArgXXCiuOwe-SKvY_JJVsQ-6EUlpU6HFvGVtGQhyg8s38SkZy9Q/s640/Emblems-InspectorResponse_Page_04.jpg" width="452" /></a></div>
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgWR8xxr4Eh_DWam5zxmuGv-GP1U9BpZ5xnFy44UmTFaGW0mPq4R6WHaXhtHxIC6DyFRxxStwfNGS_f3LiMG-r1FjBGT5ymlYRZBKC5_CWzXTfccqUmU-3uUTp-ix1w-mv6UmAArOh0vHM/s1600/Emblems-InspectorResponse_Page_05.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgWR8xxr4Eh_DWam5zxmuGv-GP1U9BpZ5xnFy44UmTFaGW0mPq4R6WHaXhtHxIC6DyFRxxStwfNGS_f3LiMG-r1FjBGT5ymlYRZBKC5_CWzXTfccqUmU-3uUTp-ix1w-mv6UmAArOh0vHM/s640/Emblems-InspectorResponse_Page_05.jpg" width="452" /></a></div>
Read more here Link: <a href="http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/committee.nsf/0/618246ad2e2641b7ca257b900022a0c4/$FILE/Inspector%20PIC%20Response.pdf">Inquiry into Performance Measures in Oversight Agencies</a><br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3816628964886325611.post-59348484425311247792013-05-30T00:00:00.000-07:002013-08-27T18:38:02.000-07:00'PIC Inspector should decide' • From: AAP<br />
<a href="http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/pic-inspector-should-decide/story-fn6cbu6v-1226372965883"> • May 30, 2012 12:00AM</a><br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/201103/r736347_5982031.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/201103/r736347_5982031.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">NSW Premier Barry O'Farrell (photo AAP: Tracey Nearmy)</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
NSW Premier Barry O'Farrell has defended blocking a parliamentary motion calling for the release of a report into a controversial internal police surveillance operation, saying it should be up to the watchdog to decide.<br />
<br />
The NSW Opposition in the upper house raised an urgency motion on Tuesday to debate whether the Police Integrity Commission's (PIC) report into its Strikeforce Emblems investigation should be made public.<br />
<br />
However, government MPs sided with crossbench MPs from the Shooters Party and Christian Democrats to block any call for papers. <br />
<br />
Strikeforce Emblems was established to investigate the propriety of an internal police operation in 2000, which put 114 people including more than 100 officers under surveillance. <br />
<br />
Some of those police are now in the top ranks of the force, including deputy commissioner Nick Kaldas, and police and their union have called for the 2005 PIC report to be released to protect the reputation of honest officers. <br />
<br />
Mr O'Farrell on Friday wrote to new PIC Inspector David Levine to ask if the PIC's Emblems report could be made public, "balancing public interest against procedural fairness and the importance of not prejudicing any potential legal action or investigation''. <br />
<br />
Police Minister Mike Gallacher has also asked the former Supreme Court Justice for advice on whether recommendations of the report could be released. <br />
<br />
Speaking in question time on Tuesday, Mr O'Farrell dismissed suggestions that blocking the upper house call for papers was <a href="http://strikeforceemblems.blogspot.com.au/2013/04/letter-to-pic-commissioner-david-levine.html">inconsistent with his letter to Mr Levine</a>. <br />
<br />
"I'd asked the Inspector General of the Police Integrity Commission, Justice Levine, a properly qualified judicial officer ... not previously connected or having anything to do with this report, to provide me with advice as to whether or not the report could be released,'' Mr O'Farrell told parliament. <br />
<br />
"That's the advice I've asked an independent officer to provide. It is not a decision I propose be put to the upper house.'' Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3816628964886325611.post-31576929074714114702013-05-06T04:00:00.000-07:002013-08-29T03:47:33.301-07:00Aggrieved officers doubt ability to handle so many alleged offences6 May 2013<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/aggrieved-officers-doubt-ability-to-handle-so-many-alleged-offences-20130505-2j14i.html">Neil Mercer </a><br />
<br />
Seven months after he was asked to investigate the alleged illegal
bugging of hundreds of NSW police, NSW Ombudsman Bruce Barbour is asking
serving and former officers and members of the public to come forward
with information.<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://images.smh.com.au/2013/05/05/4247900/art-353-nsw-20police-300x0.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://images.smh.com.au/2013/05/05/4247900/art-353-nsw-20police-300x0.jpg" width="266" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Appeal for information: NSW Ombudsman, Bruce Barbour. </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Advertisements have been placed seeking more information
about the inquiry, code named Operation Prospect, which has a budget of
$3.5 million and is likely to run for at least two years - all of it in
secret.<br />
<br />
A number of former NSW Police officers have told the <em>Herald </em>they
are reluctant to come forward because the inquiry will not hold any
public hearings, despite Premier Barry O'Farrell and Police Minister
Mike Gallacher saying they wanted any investigation to be as "open and
transparent" as possible.<br />
<br />
The former police say they are also concerned about the
ability of the Ombudsman's office to investigate so many serious and
complex alleged criminal offences.<br />
<br /> <br />
In response to a series of questions, Mr Barbour's office said Prospect had seven full-time investigative
staff and two full-time non-investigative staff. They had "extensive
operations and investigative backgrounds". A number were former police
officers but none was from NSW Police.<br />
<br />
It's not clear whether formal hearings have started. The
Ombudsman said there would be "no public announcements of the details of
private hearings". But he did reveal that some people had been given
''whistleblower'' status.<br />
<br />
"Some complaints have been received which have been
determined to be public interest disclosures" and those witnesses would
be given "all protections" afforded under the legislation, he said.<br />
<br />
Mr Barbour would not say whether he would call NSW Supreme
Court judges who had granted controversial listening device warrants,
some of which allowed the bugging of 119 people at a time.<br />
<br />
In February Mr Barbour told a parliamentary committee that
Prospect's scope was "enormous".<br />
<br />
He said his office had already received
"close to 1350 boxes of information, with more to come".<br />
<br />
Prospect will investigate whether the NSW Police special
crime and internal affairs unit (SCIA) and the NSW Crime Commission
illegally bugged hundreds of serving and former NSW Police during a
covert corruption inquiry, Operation Mascot, and whether judges were
given false information. The Police Integrity Commission was involved
later.<br />
<br />
Mascot ran from January 1999 to mid-2001. Central to the
operation was a corrupt, serving detective known as M5. While some of
those M5 bugged were bent, many were honest, and dozens of serving and
former detectives say their names were put on listening device warrants
illegally or improperly and in some cases as a "get square".<br />
<br />
Although the allegations of wrongdoing date back more than a
decade, the reputations and careers of the most senior NSW Police are on
the line.<br />
<br />
At crucial times, Commissioner Andrew Scipione was
responsible for SCIA and was warned of possible wrongdoing in a memo
dated November 2001, which he referred to his superiors.<br />
<br />
One of the key SCIA officers involved in the bugging was Cath
Burn (pictured), now one of Mr Scipione's deputies. One of those bugged
was Nick Kaldas, now a deputy commissioner.<br />
<br />
The state government announced the inquiry in October after
Fairfax published details of secret NSW Police reports into the bugging
scandal. The reports, by Strike Force Emblems, were suppressed by
successive governments. Emblems found "criminal conduct" might have
been behind some of the bugging and that false information might have
been given to judges. But the reports were inconclusive because the NSW
Crime Commission refused to hand over crucial documents, citing secrecy
provisions.<br />
<br />
The <em>Herald </em>has obtained new evidence that
information in one of the Mascot affidavits was false. A former officer
says a ''meeting'' between him and M5 "never happened" and is a
complete fabrication.<br />
<div style="background-color: white; border: medium none; color: black; overflow: hidden; text-align: left; text-decoration: none;">
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3816628964886325611.post-35140236358153691312013-04-17T04:00:00.000-07:002013-08-27T18:24:21.990-07:00Letter to PIC Commissioner David Levine <div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhngPkRTrURle74rWj81DdT2h7BydSh-CcHO4DiTSbijx8s5v7AQvexIwnNpoTP7ZfBdipKqLqjaHkW4xY9nv8yeT4NVsI0YOGF6R_Y4j6YObzjOdDrwGcNA5kLLGyI5DVVWi7ntlGyrek/s1600/Emblems-InspectorResponse_Page_12.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhngPkRTrURle74rWj81DdT2h7BydSh-CcHO4DiTSbijx8s5v7AQvexIwnNpoTP7ZfBdipKqLqjaHkW4xY9nv8yeT4NVsI0YOGF6R_Y4j6YObzjOdDrwGcNA5kLLGyI5DVVWi7ntlGyrek/s640/Emblems-InspectorResponse_Page_12.jpg" width="452" /></a></div>
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3816628964886325611.post-62076456854037545992012-11-28T02:30:00.000-08:002013-08-26T04:57:56.237-07:00Bugging report too dangerous to release <a href="http://www.news.com.au/national-news/nsw-act/bugging-report-too-dangerous-to-release/story-fndo4bst-1226525281492"><strong>November 28th 2012 </strong></a><br />
<br />
<strong>THE secret police report into the
widespread phone-tapping and bugging of over 110 serving and former
officers was too "dangerous" to be released, the Inspector of the Police
Integrity Commission, David Levine, said yesterday. </strong><br />
<strong> </strong>
<br />
The reputations of the NSW Police Force and individual officers
could be trashed if the report and recommendations by strike force
Emblems were made public, the former Supreme Court judge said.<br />
<br />
Mr
Levine said while he could understand the concerns of the 114 people
named in just one of the warrants investigated by strike force Emblems,
the final decision to release the report should lie with NSW Ombudsman
Bruce Barbour.<br />
<br />
Police Minister Michael Gallacher denied this was
another attempt to bury the report which he had pledged to release when
he got into government.<br />
<br />
Police Association president Scott Weber
said those police officers affected felt the matter was "not being
taken seriously" and rejected criticism of the Emblems investigators.<br />
<br />
"Many of (the officers) were senior and respected police officers," Mr Weber said.<br />
<br />
"They
did their absolute best despite zero co-operation from the NSW Crime
Commission and limited access to information. They were even subjected
to threats of being prosecuted under the draconian secrecy provisions."<br />
<br />
Strike
force Emblems was set up in 2003 after a number of officers, including
one of the now-deputy commissioners Nick Kaldas, made complaints about
being bugged by the police's Special Crime and Internal Affairs unit
working with the Crime Commission and the PIC in what was called
Operation Mascot. The operation's leader was Superintendent Catherine
Burn, another current deputy commissioner.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3816628964886325611.post-74089779200372119862012-11-27T19:02:00.000-08:002013-08-26T19:18:45.126-07:00REPORT OF THE INSPECTOR OF THE POLICE INTEGRITY COMMISSION INTO STRIKE FORCE EMBLEMSTuesday 27 November 2012<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwx19-PLT-RJyqVIkerWOtMx59FWm5e20Cygev_cl-uwWub6V9gNbGmC129QAPbPKXCuCQHSD-TU8fLUbtIGYlU3DvSH0G7lbOKBzk1jzGBAcNG9wdpYJFhUuzSGLaCTAIc2iP9pUAx5M/s1600/20121127_InspectorPICStrikeForceEmblems.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwx19-PLT-RJyqVIkerWOtMx59FWm5e20Cygev_cl-uwWub6V9gNbGmC129QAPbPKXCuCQHSD-TU8fLUbtIGYlU3DvSH0G7lbOKBzk1jzGBAcNG9wdpYJFhUuzSGLaCTAIc2iP9pUAx5M/s1600/20121127_InspectorPICStrikeForceEmblems.jpg" height="640" width="452" /></a></div>
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3816628964886325611.post-73260370847890718532012-11-23T04:00:00.000-08:002013-08-26T19:21:17.512-07:00Letter to The Hon Michael Gallacher MLC from Inspector of the Police Integrity Commision<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiud48Jgv5zu6XTWuVMOnTh6jrqA3H47LT_aJMupr5aO6uWUTfpcRH5pPwN7g8cYVHFe1Cl6zjDMB0Pf2cWim_TKaRnjeV1mfh9KElz7ZKcCvKSVRKC57bCbeWsLIy3lK7reiYL8WkyOYk/s1600/20121127_LetterFromInspectorPIC_StrikeForceEmblems_Page_1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiud48Jgv5zu6XTWuVMOnTh6jrqA3H47LT_aJMupr5aO6uWUTfpcRH5pPwN7g8cYVHFe1Cl6zjDMB0Pf2cWim_TKaRnjeV1mfh9KElz7ZKcCvKSVRKC57bCbeWsLIy3lK7reiYL8WkyOYk/s1600/20121127_LetterFromInspectorPIC_StrikeForceEmblems_Page_1.jpg" height="640" width="451" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZM6r2OGLA0l66vwiK6Bc1mxZwe1vndUIQtZtcpOCNRgjOtPE5Z1tqtF-OBdA28EYDlgVUh_B47VzLRcx9GqKkV2vB-fYFDmY9PtUlyw6Ufdb5-Zmsm1iM0MrDAHWIvEX9p2IGVJ0Q2dM/s1600/20121127_LetterFromInspectorPIC_StrikeForceEmblems_Page_2.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjZM6r2OGLA0l66vwiK6Bc1mxZwe1vndUIQtZtcpOCNRgjOtPE5Z1tqtF-OBdA28EYDlgVUh_B47VzLRcx9GqKkV2vB-fYFDmY9PtUlyw6Ufdb5-Zmsm1iM0MrDAHWIvEX9p2IGVJ0Q2dM/s1600/20121127_LetterFromInspectorPIC_StrikeForceEmblems_Page_2.jpg" height="640" width="451" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUK1-RmennaE1BTZ0gDI0iP0xh3QWpUCuUOwnhIHtiF5g1BCN7COXL75M-3-89c9pYj0xs8q9xs2PPEMr1GSVDsVUuGmswncE5ADw2cS-GR7WVWk1M7CXL1Ct1UyG0KiQ-jDFHzxmy2A8/s1600/20121127_LetterFromInspectorPIC_StrikeForceEmblems_Page_3.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUK1-RmennaE1BTZ0gDI0iP0xh3QWpUCuUOwnhIHtiF5g1BCN7COXL75M-3-89c9pYj0xs8q9xs2PPEMr1GSVDsVUuGmswncE5ADw2cS-GR7WVWk1M7CXL1Ct1UyG0KiQ-jDFHzxmy2A8/s1600/20121127_LetterFromInspectorPIC_StrikeForceEmblems_Page_3.jpg" height="640" width="452" /></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3816628964886325611.post-66209197615510103372012-11-20T19:00:00.000-08:002013-08-27T19:01:31.902-07:00Operation Emblems & FLorida - OMBUDSMAN AMENDMENT BILL 2012<span style="font-size: large;"><b>OMBUDSMAN AMENDMENT BILL 2012</b></span><br />
<div style="text-align: right;">
20 November 2012</div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
Page: 33</div>
<div style="text-align: right;">
</div>
<br />Bill introduced on motion by Mr Greg Smith, read a first time and printed.<br />
<br /><b>Second Reading</b><br />
<br />Mr GREG SMITH (Epping—Attorney General, and Minister for Justice) [4.02 p.m.]: I move:<br />That this bill be now read a second time.<br />
<br />The Government is pleased to introduce The Ombudsman Amendment Bill 2012 to modify the jurisdiction and powers for the NSW Ombudsman to inquire into matters that simultaneously touch upon the New South Wales Crime Commission and the Police Integrity Commission. Since this Government took office last year, the Parliament has passed legislation to reform the governance arrangements for both the New South Wales Crime Commission and the Police Integrity Commission, the PIC. This reflects the Government's commitment to effective integrity settings for the State's law enforcement institutions. However, as members may be aware, there is a long-running matter involving these two commissions and the NSW Police Force that is yet to be resolved to the satisfaction of the Government and the community. That matter is commonly known as Strike Force Emblems, and it has its roots in crime investigation and police integrity operations that began more than a decade ago.<br />
<br />
Strike Force Emblems was an internal NSW Police Force inquiry established in 2003 to investigate aspects of Operation Florida, a joint operation involving the Crime Commission, the Police Force and the Police Integrity Commission. The report of Strike Force Emblems has not been made public. In May this year the Government asked the Hon. David Levine, QC, Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission, to review the report and advise whether it could be released. However, while undertaking the review Mr Levine received a number of complaints and submissions in connection to matters in the Emblems report. The NSW Ombudsman also received complaints concerning matters arising from the report. On 7 October this year the Premier announced that the Ombudsman and the Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission had conferred and agreed that the Ombudsman would be well placed to undertake an independent inquiry into Strike Force Emblems and any relevant matters leading up to it. The breadth of the complaints received by both offices meant it was appropriate for the Ombudsman to investigate. The Ombudsman is the appropriate independent body to comprehensively review these matters. The Government will ensure that the Ombudsman has the appropriate powers to undertake his work.<br />
<br />
The first step to providing the Ombudsman with additional powers was taken when the Act was amended by proclamation on 10 October 2012. That amendment authorised the Ombudsman to investigate certain complaints regarding the conduct of executive officers of the New South Wales Crime Commission and members of the committee. This extension was limited to circumstances where the conduct in question is referred to the Ombudsman by the Inspector of the Crime Commission or the Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission. The Ombudsman Amendment Bill 2012 that I am introducing today will deliver the further powers that the Ombudsman requires to conduct his inquiry. The intention of this bill is to provide the Ombudsman with the necessary authority to inquire into operations and matters that traverse the functions and activities of the organisations involved in crime detection and crime agency integrity. The bill provides the Ombudsman with a framework in which he is able to conduct an effective inquiry covering all the relevant agencies and officers connected with Strike Force Emblems. The Ombudsman already has broad powers concerning investigation of police conduct, including coercive powers to compel witnesses to attend private hearings and to produce evidence. Under the provisions in this bill, these coercive powers are extended to the Crime Commission and the Police Integrity Commission where there has been a referral from an appropriate inspector, being either the Inspector of the Crime Commission or the Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission. The bill will not authorise the Ombudsman to exercise coercive powers unless there has been a referral from an inspector. It will remain the function of the Police Integrity Commission and the Inspector of the Crime Commission to oversee the conduct of the Crime Commission and the Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission to oversee the Police Integrity Commission where there is no relevant overlap.<br />
<br />
Turning now to the detail of the bill, schedule 1 amends the Ombudsman Act 1974. Item [1] of schedule 1 provides for the Ombudsman to appoint legal counsel, who must be an Australian legal practitioner, to assist in an inquiry. Such an arrangement is consistent with those for other integrity agencies. New powers for the Ombudsman to restrict the publication of evidence or information provided to an inquiry, and the prohibitions against the publication of evidence or information provided to an inquiry, are set out in item [2]. These will provide a significant forensic benefit to an Ombudsman's inquiry by maintaining strict confidentiality of investigation-related information. The provisions mirror those that apply under the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act and the Police Integrity Commission Act. Schedule 2 to the bill amends the Crime Commission Act 2012.<br />
<br />
Item [1] in schedule 2 requires that a referral by the Inspector of the Crime Commission to any public authority, which includes the Ombudsman, must include written terms. Item [2] of schedule 2 supports the provision of Crime Commission information to the Ombudsman, notwithstanding the secrecy provisions of the Crime Commission Act. New subsection 80A (1) permits the voluntary disclosure of Crime Commission information to the Ombudsman. The Ombudsman may instead, under new subsection 80A (2), rely on the coercive powers to compel the giving of evidence or production of a document. These powers are only available, however, if the evidence or document is relevant to a matter referred to the Ombudsman by the inspector of either the Crime Commission or the Police Integrity Commission. Item [3] of schedule 2 clarifies that the secrecy provision of the Crime Commission Act—section 80—applies to all material that was previously subject to section 29 of the repealed New South Wales Crime Commission Act 1985.<br />
<br />
New section 80 is preferable to section 29 of the repealed Act in a number of respects, including because it allows for regulations to be made prescribing persons to whom information can be disclosed without breaching the secrecy provision.<br />
<br />
It is appropriate to adopt the more up-to-date formulation for all relevant material. The final schedule to the bill is schedule 3, which amends the Police Integrity Commission Act 1996 to provide the Ombudsman with coercive powers in relation to the Police Integrity Commission upon referral of a matter from either the Police Integrity Commission inspector or the Crime Commission inspector. In conclusion, these amendments will support an important inquiry by the Ombudsman into a matter that has remained unresolved for far too long. The Ombudsman, the Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission, the Police Integrity Commission, the New South Wales Crime Commission, and the Ministry for Police and Emergency Services has each been consulted during the development of the bill. I thank each of those agencies for their constructive approach in this matter.<br />
<br />
The amendments have been drafted to take into account the integrity oversight arrangements already in place. They provide an efficient but comprehensive set of arrangements for inquiries into matters of conduct that simultaneously touch upon the Police Force, the Police Integrity Commission and the Crime Commission. The Government looks forward to the successful conclusion of the Ombudsman's inquiry and his report. I commend the bill to the House.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/Prod/Parlment/nswbills.nsf/0/9c1e98be50bd6381ca257abc001bb042/$FILE/2R%20OMBUDSMAN%20AMENDMENT%20BILL%202012.pdf">Refer: Link</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3816628964886325611.post-92195765794349319542012-10-08T04:08:00.000-07:002013-08-26T04:08:52.968-07:00NSW Ombudsman to investigate police strike force<a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-07/nsw-ombudsman-to-investigate-police-strike-force/4299598">Updated Mon 8 Oct 2012, 9:23am </a><br />
<br />
<div class="first">
A New South Wales strike force set up to examine police corruption will itself be investigated by the Ombudsman.</div>
<div class="first">
<br /></div>
Strike Force Emblems was launched in 2003 to investigate allegations of corruption and abuse of power in the police force.<br />
<br />
It
was set up three years after a warrant was granted permitting the
surveillance of more than a hundred police officers and two civilians.<br />
<br />
Premier
Barry O'Farrell says the Police Integrity Commission and the Ombudsman
have agreed Strike Force Emblems should be investigated.<br />
<br />
In a
statement, Mr O'Farrell says the decision for the Ombudsman to conduct
an independent investigation was made following a number of complaints
and submissions against the strike force.<br />
<br />
Greens MP David Shoebridge has raised concerns that the Ombudsman does not have the power to conduct an effective investigation.<br />
<br />
Mr Shoebridge says any investigation by the Ombudsman will be ineffectual.<br />
<br />
"The
Ombudsman himself made it clear to me when I spoke to him at the end of
last month that he did not have sufficient powers," he said.<br />
<br />
"What
is required is a full judicial inquiry with a full set of powers to
pierce the secrecy provisions that the Crime Commission and the Police
Integrity Commission have hidden behind for more than a decade."<br />
<br />
A
former assistant commissioner Clive Small agrees it should be an open
and transparent inquiry with the powers of a Royal Commission.<br />
<br />
"They
constitute allegations of systemic misconduct and corruption, not only
within the police, but possibly within other organisations as well
including the Crime Commission and the Police Integrity Commission," he
said.<br />
<br />
"That's a pretty big allegation, it's very serious and it's
something where the public of New South Wales needs to have confidence
in both the inquiry and the result."<br />
<br />
The Police Integrity
Commissioner is still considering a request from Mr O'Farrell to
publicly release a Strike Force Emblems report examining the
surveillance of police officers.<br />
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3816628964886325611.post-7968172880709594192012-10-02T01:00:00.000-07:002013-08-26T04:30:33.427-07:00Judicial inquiry the only way to end questions over police chief<dl><a href="http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/judicial-inquiry-the-only-way-to-end-questions-over-police-chief-20121001-26vl5.html"><time datetime="October 2, 2012">October 2, 2012</time></a><div style="background-color: white; border: medium none; color: black; overflow: hidden; text-align: left; text-decoration: none;">
<br />
Catherine Burn's new duties are at odds with unresolved claims, writes Neil Mercer.<br />
<div style="background-color: white; border: medium none; color: black; overflow: hidden; text-align: left; text-decoration: none;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background-color: white; border: medium none; color: black; overflow: hidden; text-align: left; text-decoration: none;">
The NSW police Deputy Commissioner Catherine Burn this week becomes
responsible for specialist operations, putting her in charge of squads
such as homicide, counterterrorism and professional standards - which
used to be known as Special Crime and Internal Affairs (SCIA).<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; height: 450px; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right; width: 340px;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://images.theage.com.au/2012/10/01/3680203/art-353-burn-300x0.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="http://images.theage.com.au/2012/10/01/3680203/art-353-burn-300x0.jpg" width="286" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">"May have participated in police corruption", according to a secret NSW police report ... Deputy Commissioner Catherine Burn. <i>Photo: Michel O'Sullivan</i></td><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"></td><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><br />
<i></i></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
This move places her in a powerful position to succeed the
Commissioner, Andrew Scipione. But it also puts Burn in an invidious, if
not untenable, position.<br />
<br />
Serious unanswered questions relating to her time in the
controversial SCIA unit more than a decade ago remain. Indeed, as
revealed in <i>The Sun-Herald</i>, a secret NSW police report states Burn ''may have participated in police corruption'' while she worked there.<br />
<br />
So how is it that Burn is now installed as the head of
internal affairs and in charge of the state's most experienced and
senior detectives with such serious claims still unresolved.<br />
<br />
The report, by Strike Force Emblems, written in 2004, examined
complaints against Burn and three other SCIA officers who were involved
in an undercover operation on the north coast.<br />
<br />
It said there was no evidence to bring criminal or disciplinary charges against her or the others and the <i>Herald </i>does
not suggest Burn is corrupt. But, critically, the report also states
its inquiries hit a roadblock when it was denied access to crucial
documents and witnesses.<br />
<br />
This was because, at the time, SCIA was running a covert
inquiry into police corruption code-named Operation Mascot and, as a
result of the NSW Crime Commission's involvement, the highest secrecy
provisions applied.<br />
<br />
When Emblems detectives investigating Burn went knocking on
the crime commission's Kent Street door for help, it rolled down the
shutters.<br />
<br />
Scipione says he has not read the Emblems report because of
the secrecy provisions. Why a report written by NSW police for the then
commissioner, Ken Moroney, is secret from the current commissioner
remains a mystery. Nevertheless Scipione, like Sergeant Schultz from <i>Hogan's Heroes</i>, knows nothing.<br />
<br />
But leaked documents reveal that Scipione received an email
in November 2001, explicitly warning him that some officers within SCIA
were worried about the legality of telephone taps and the release of
''fictitious information'' to obtain listening devices. There were other
serious concerns about wrongdoing. Scipione was SCIA's commander at
the time.<br />
<br />
Some of those concerns expressed in 2001 were followed up by
the Emblems investigators. Its report found that ''criminal conduct''
and personal vendettas may have been behind one particular SCIA/crime
commission bugging operation in September 2000.<br />
<br />
On September 14 that year, Justice Virginia Bell of the
Supreme Court approved an application for a listening device. It allowed
SCIA and the crime commission to bug a staggering 114 people over a
21-day period.<br />
<br />
There is another problem that arises in all this. Ms Burn
must now work alongside senior commanders who, just 10 years ago, she
nominated as being corrupt. Ticklish, to say the least.<br />
<br />
Scipione, Burn and the state government have refused calls
for an independent judicial inquiry. The matters, they say, are being
looked into by the Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission, David
Levine, a former Supreme Court judge.<br />
<br />
At best, this is disingenuous. Levine has told Parliament
he is looking at whether Emblems' report, or its recommendations, can
be released. When this reporter asked him if he was only working one
day a week as Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission, he declined
to comment.<br />
<br />
Levine does not have the time or resources to explore and
resolve the serious matters raised by Emblems, including those
involving Burn.<br />
<br />
It appears the Premier, Barry O'Farrell, is being poorly
advised. This matter has been going for 10 years and it will not go
away.<br />
<br />
A judicial inquiry is needed. The serving and former police affected deserve the truth and so do the people of NSW.</div>
</div>
</dl>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3816628964886325611.post-74257828501018104502012-09-30T01:30:00.000-07:002013-08-29T03:57:28.967-07:00Crime Commission knew agent had lied in court, records revealSeptember 30 2012<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/crime-commission-knew-agent-had-lied-in-court-records-reveal-20120929-26s7u.html">Neil Mercer </a><br />
<br />
IT WAS August, 2000. A massive covert investigation into NSW Police corruption, called Operation Mascot, was in full swing.<br />
<br />
Run by three bodies - NSW police from within the Special Crime and
Internal Affairs unit, the NSW Crime Commission and the Police Integrity
Commission - it had been going since February the previous year. It
depended heavily on a corrupt NSW police officer, codenamed M5, who was
working undercover, recording his colleagues.<br />
<br />
But secret Crime Commission documents obtained by <i>The Sun-Herald</i> reveal that at least two of those agencies knew on August 23, 2000, that they had a serious problem.<br />
<br />
The problem was this: M5, who was working for SCIA and the Crime
Commission, had privately admitted to his superiors that in order to
obtain search warrants he had told lies in court.<br />
<div class="ad adCentred" id="adspot-300x250-pos-3">
<small><br /></small><noscript></noscript> </div>
The documents show that at a meeting on August 23, 2000, M5 admitted his
perjury to a senior SCIA officer, Detective Superintendent John Dolan,
and to the then assistant director of investigations at the NSW Crime
Commission, Mark Standen.<br />
<br />
They also reveal that another SCIA officer, the then Detective
Inspector Cath Burn, compiled an "information report" about the matter
on September 5 that year.<br />
<br />
<i>The Sun-Herald</i> has been unable to establish whether the magistrate was ever informed that M5 had admitted lying in court.<br />
<br />
The document says: ''[M5] informed Dolan/Standen that he swore
information in support of an application for a search warrant [integrity
test] knowing that information to be false.<br />
<br />
"[He] said that he was very sorry for his actions and is aware of the problem it presents.''<br />
<i>The Sun-Herald </i>does not suggest Ms Burn is corrupt.<br />
<br />
On Friday morning, <i>The Sun-Herald </i>sent a series of questions to
Ms Burn, now a NSW Police Deputy Commissioner. Through her lawyers
Commissioner Burn issued a statement saying she was ''under an
obligation not to disclose information or to make comment … as any
disclosure would constitute a criminal offence due to the secrecy
provisions of the NSW Crime Commission''.<br />
<br />
Mr Dolan is no longer in the police and could not be contacted. Mark
Standen, once the crime commission's top investigator, was not available
for comment. He is serving a 22-year jail term for an unrelated matter -
planning a 300-kilogram drug importation.<br />
<br />
The latest leak to <i>The Sun-Herald</i> follows revelations reported in recent weeks about unethical, improper or illegal activities by some officers within SCIA.<br />
<br />
The state government has so far rejected calls for an independent
judicial inquiry, saying the matters are under investigation by the
Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission, the former Supreme Court
judge David Levine.<br />
<br />
But Mr Levine himself has said he is simply assessing whether the
recommendations of Strike Force Emblems, or its report, can be publicly
released.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3816628964886325611.post-63968669633323631852012-09-12T03:00:00.000-07:002013-08-26T04:13:14.385-07:00STRIKE FORCE EMBLEMS REPORT<span><b> </b></span><span><div align="center" class="BlueText" style="background-image: none;">
<a href="http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/hanstrans.nsf/V3ByKey/LC20120912?Open&refNavID="><b>LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL</b></a><br />
<br />
Wednesday 12 September 2012<br />
<br />
</div>
<br />
<b>The President (The Hon. Donald Thomas Harwin) </b>took the chair at 11.00 a.m.<br />
<br />
<b>The President </b>read the Prayers.</span><br />
<br />
<span><b>Mr DAVID SHOEBRIDGE:</b> I direct my question without notice to
the Minister for Police and Emergency Services. Given the recent
revelations about police wire-tapping operations that were reviewed in
the Strike Force Emblems report, has the Minister asked the Commissioner
of Police why he has not read this critical report on past police
practice? If not, why not?<br />
<br />
<b>The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER:</b> Members are aware of the response I
have given thus far in relation to this matter. I can recall telling
members some years ago that I would release the recommendations
contained in the Emblems report. But I realised, having read the
recommendations when I became the Minister for Police and Emergency
Services, that if those recommendations were released in the form in
which they are recorded in that report, it would not be possible for
anyone to determine them as conclusive. For that reason, in May of this
year I asked the independent Inspector of the Police Integrity
Commission, Mr David Levine, QC, to examine whether the recommendations
contained in the Emblems report had been satisfactorily implemented and
whether those recommendations may be made available to the public. The
Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission is the appropriate
authority to conduct such a review—
<b>Mr David Shoebridge:</b> Point of order: My point of order is
relevance. The question is about why the Commissioner of Police has not
read the Strike Force Emblems report. It is not about a referral history
to the Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission.<br />
<br />
<b>The PRESIDENT:</b> Order! There is no point of order.<br />
<br />
<b>The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER:</b> The Inspector of the Police Integrity
Commission is the appropriate authority to conduct such a review—a fact
supported and accepted by the New South Wales Police Association. The
Premier, who was responsible for the Police Integrity Commission Act,
has further asked the Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission
whether the Emblems report can be publicly released in its entirety.
This request has been made in the interests of openness and transparency
and to put to rest lingering concerns over this decade-old matter.
The Government has no intention of changing its timetable because of
dangerous leaks to the media. Justice Levine will consider the Emblems
report in whatever time frame he requires and with whatever support he
requests from the Government. My priority is to ensure that, whatever
happens, investigations into serious organised crime and corruption are
not compromised, that the identity of human sources—informants—is
protected, and that the lives of officers who investigate serious crimes
are not threatened by the release of highly protected information
concerning police investigations. I imagine all members would share
those priorities. With that in mind I ask that Justice Levine be given
the time he needs to complete his inquiries. In response to Mr David
Shoebridge's point as to why the Commissioner of Police has not read the
report, I suggest that he take the opportunity to ask the commissioner
that himself during the estimates hearings.<br />
<br />
<b>Mr DAVID SHOEBRIDGE:</b> I ask a supplementary question. Will the
Minister elucidate his answer by advising the House whether or not the
Government will commit to releasing Justice Levine's report in full when
it is received?
<b>The Hon. Matthew Mason-Cox:</b> Point of order: That was not a supplementary question. It was a new question.<br />
<br />
<b>The PRESIDENT:</b> Order! The question is in order.<br />
<br />
<b>The Hon. MICHAEL GALLACHER:</b> As Mr David Shoebridge well knows,
the Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission is able to print,
publish and publicly release his or her own report. I will await Mr
Levine's finding, but Mr David Shoebridge can take it from me that I
want to make sure that this matter is put to rest once and for all. I am
sick and tired of the innuendo, the suggestions of conspiracies. I want
to see this matter put to rest just as much as Mr David Shoebridge and
all the parties involved do. But I want to ensure that is done by a
significant figure who will look at the evidence and make the
determinations, not by politicians or others who may well have an
interest in the matter.<br />
</span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3816628964886325611.post-8516387111061151922012-09-10T03:00:00.000-07:002013-08-29T04:05:19.881-07:00O'Farrell 'appalled' but rebuffs call for inquiry<h1 class="cN-headingPage">
</h1>
<h3 class="authorName">
<a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/ofarrell-appalled-but-rebuffs-call-for-inquiry-20120909-25mhg.html">Lisa Davies</a></h3>
<h4 class="authorTitle">
Crime Editor </h4>
<h1 class="cN-headingPage">
<span style="font-size: small;">Date<time datetime="September 10, 2012"> September 10, 2012 </time></span></h1>
THE NSW Premier, Barry O'Farrell, is resisting calls for a judicial
inquiry into the secret bugging of more than 100 officers, despite
admitting he is ''appalled'' by the serious allegations raised.<br />
<br />
As revealed by <em>The Sun-Herald </em>yesterday, the
long-buried report by Strike Force Emblems alleges ''systemic corruption
and mismanagement'' by some officers within the force's internal
affairs unit.<br />
<br />
The president of the NSW Police Association, Scott Weber,
said the report clearly detailed ''allegations of the most serious
abuses of power within the three organisations tasked with over-sighting
police conduct''.<br />
<br />
He said the government should immediately authorise a
judicial inquiry ''to ensure that all officers wrongly named can have
their integrity cleared''.<br />
<br />
But Mr O'Farrell said he would do nothing until he received advice
from the inspector of the Police Integrity Commission, the former
Supreme Court justice David Levine, whom he asked in May to examine
whether the report should be released.<br />
<br />
''I'm appalled at what I read in the media about the report, I
haven't seen it … [but] I'm not going to tell the independent PIC
inspector-general how to do his job,'' Mr O'Farrell said yesterday.<br />
<br />
''I think the first point here is to get the report out, that's what I've asked [for], whether or not that can occur.''<br />
<br />
But the <em>Herald </em>has learnt the Premier may be waiting
for a while - Justice Levine is only required to work a maximum of two
days a week and has no staff other than a part-time secretary.<br />
<br />
Meanwhile, many of the police the report describes as
having been placed on listening device warrants for ''no justification''
are understood to be considering legal action for compensation for the
damage to their reputations.<br />
<br />
It is expected they will use the action taken by officers
aggrieved over a covert taskforce codenamed ''Bax'' into organised crime
in Kings Cross as a precedent. That legal action resulted in a
compensation payout of almost $10 million.<br />
<span style="font-size: small;"><time datetime="September 10, 2012"></time></span><a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/ofarrell-appalled-but-rebuffs-call-for-inquiry-20120909-25mhg.html#ixzz2dM440STj" style="color: #003399;"></a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3816628964886325611.post-42620067096165859962012-09-09T03:00:00.000-07:002013-08-26T04:43:27.636-07:00Bugging bombshell as secret files revealed <time datetime="September 9, 2012">September 9, 2012</time><br />
<time datetime="September 9, 2012"></time><a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/bugging-bombshell-as-secret-files-revealed-20120908-25l0k.html#ixzz260XPpZBk"><time datetime="September 9, 2012">By Neil Mercer </time></a><br />
<br />
Hundreds of pages of secret NSW police documents contain allegations of
"systemic corruption and mismanagement" by some officers within the
force’s internal affairs unit, the so-called "white knights".<br />
<dl><div class="author optionA">
<div class="cT-headshot">
</div>
</div>
</dl>
<div style="background-color: white; border: medium none; color: black; overflow: hidden; text-align: left; text-decoration: none;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background-color: white; border: medium none; color: black; overflow: hidden; text-align: left; text-decoration: none;">
Documents obtained by <em>The Sun-Herald</em>, allege some officers
in Special Crime and Internal Affairs - or SCIA - falsified information
to obtain listening devices, telephone intercepts and search warrants
and, in one case, induced a criminal to commit perjury in front of a
magistrate.<br />
<blockquote class="cN-quote">
<div style="text-align: center;">
</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
"I smelt a rat … I was settling old scores"<span> </span></div>
</blockquote>
They also show that Parliament, the public and rank-and-file
police have been repeatedly misled about the reasons why one listening
device warrant contained the names of 112 serving and former police and
two civilians, including a journalist.<br />
<br />
<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://images.smh.com.au/2012/09/09/3620743/art-Dolan-620x349.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="225" src="http://images.smh.com.au/2012/09/09/3620743/art-Dolan-620x349.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Former detective inspector Malcolm Brammer (left) and former detective sergeant John Dolan in 1991. <em>Photo: David Porter</em></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
In that case, many officers, including the present deputy commissioner
Nick Kaldas, believed they were victims of a personal "vendetta'' by
officers within SCIA.<br />
<div style="background-color: white; border: medium none; color: black; overflow: hidden; text-align: left; text-decoration: none;">
<br /></div>
<div style="background-color: white; border: medium none; color: black; overflow: hidden; text-align: left; text-decoration: none;">
And M5 - the corrupt officer turned undercover operator who secretly
taped his colleagues - agreed. He told investigators: "I was assisting,
nurturing corruption." He also said: ''I smelt a rat … I was settling
old scores which related to my supervising Superintendent."<br />
<br />
The bombshell allegations are contained in long-suppressed
reports of internal strike forces code-named Sibutu, Tumen and Emblems,
which were established to investigate complaints made about SCIA between
1997 and 2002.<br />
<br />
<em>The Sun-Herald</em> has now seen copies of all three reports, which the police hierarchy and successive governments have refused to release.<br />
<br />
Strike Force Emblems was set up in 2003 to investigate a
controversial listening-device warrant approved in September, 2000. It
contained the names of 112 serving and former police and two civilians -
and it was one of dozens sought by SCIA officers and the NSW Crime
Commission, which were running a covert inquiry into police corruption,
Operation Mascot.<br />
<br />
But its net was so wide that it placed under surveillance
dozens of honest officers, including the current deputy commissioner
Nick Kaldas, Detective Inspector Wayne Hayes, Assistant Commissioner Ken
Mackay, and Detective Superintendent Paul Jones.<br />
<br />
The key player in Operation Mascot was a corrupt NSW cop,
code-named M5, who wore a listening device for two and a half years and
recorded hundreds of conversations with his colleagues. His home was
also bugged, as was his car, his briefcase and his mobile phone.<br />
<br />
The Emblems report says eight SCIA officers, including its
then boss, Assistant Commissioner Mal Brammer, his deputy Superintendent
John Dolan and then acting Inspector Cath Burn were among those
investigated. Ms Burn is now Mr Kaldas's fellow deputy commissioner, and
both are touted as potential commissioners. Emblems does not make any
findings against any particular officer.<br />
<br />
It says its inquiries were hampered by the refusal of the NSW
Crime Commission to hand over crucial documents, including affidavits,
and it therefore could not reach definitive conclusions.<br />
<br />
Nevertheless, it found:<br />
<strong></strong>There were clear indications that "criminal conduct may have occurred surrounding the affidavit".<br />
<strong></strong>On the available evidence there was no
justification for 54 serving and former police and the journalist Steve
Barrett being placed on the listening-device warrant.<br />
<br />
<strong></strong>Previous Strike Forces Sibutu, Tumen and
Operation Banks had identified "systemic corruption and mismanagement"
within SCIA in relation to listening devices, telephone intercepts and
search warrants. Serious adverse findings of corruption had been found
against senior officers attached to SCIA.<br />
<br />
Strike Force Emblems suspected similar "alleged corruption".
It reveals M5 became disillusioned with his SCIA handlers and believed
they were sending him to record conversations with honest police in a
bid to settle old scores. It is believed one of those was Mr Kaldas.<br />
<br />
It is well known in police circles that at one stage, Mr
Kaldas and John Dolan had a serious disagreement. Emblems says that,
about a month after that confrontation, M5 approached Mr Kaldas, who
then became suspicious and reported the matter to the then deputy
commissioner, Ken Moroney.<br />
M5, who worked undercover between February 1999 and mid-2001,
said: "I was sent by my supervising Superintendent to a particular
person five or six times, I smelt a rat … I was settling old scores.''
He said he was uncertain of the true motives of those supervising him.<br />
<br />
Mr Brammer, who left the force in mid-2002, yesterday denied
any wrongdoing and strenuously denied any knowledge of a vendetta. [See
separate story.]<br />
<br />
Mr Brammer has been the subject of adverse findings in
previous internal police reports, including for "untruthfulness" a
"manifest conflict of interest" as well as "bias" and "a lack of
fairness". One inquiry found he allegedly perverted the course of
justice by improperly arranging an internal investigation against an
officer.<br />
<br />
Mr Dolan, who has also left the force, could not be reached for comment.<br />
<br />
Mr Brammer has previously said Operation Mascot was run with
the full co-operation and supervision of the Crime Commission and the
Police Integrity Commission. He said the current Police Commissioner,
Andrew Scipione, was involved at the time and he knew of no improper
conduct by Ms Burn or anyone else.<br />
<br />
At least one former SCIA officer has raised the "vendetta"
allegation. In a formal record of interview with one of Emblems'
predecessors, Strike Force Tumen, the detective Paul Albury says he
thought the targeting of Mr Kaldas was based more on a "personal
vendetta" rather than any evidence.<br />
<br />
The officer says there was deep concern by some within the
unit that serving and former officers were being targeted on the basis
of "third and fourth-person hearsay''.<br />
<br />
The previous Labor government and the O'Farrell government
have refused to release the Emblems report, despite the current police
minister, Mike Gallacher, pushing for its release while in opposition.<br />
The Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission, David
Levine, has been asked by the State Government to investigate whether
the Strike Force Emblems report can be released. He is currently working
his way though documents provided to him by NSW Police and the Crime
Commission. It is not known when his inquiry will be completed.<br />
<br />
Some former detectives named on the warrant believe he has
not been given the resources needed to get to the bottom of the
long-running saga. They believe an independent judicial inquiry is
required - free of police intervention.<br />
<br />
They say the Police Integrity Commission is disqualified from
investigating the matter because it was intimately involved with SCIA
and the Crime Commission in Operation Mascot from an early stage.<br />
<br />
Strike Force Emblems interviewed 35 people who complained
about their names being on the warrant. Emblems found there was no
justification for 22 of those, including Mr Kaldas, being on the
warrant. Overall, it found that of the 114 people named, there was
probably no justification for 54 of them being on it.<br />
<br />
"The use of 114 names on the subject listening device is an
abuse of process and not in the 'spirit' of the legislation. It is not
conceivable each person would be part of a conversation over a 21-day
period."<br />
<br />
(Warrants are approved for 21 days. Police need to reapply if they want to continue bugging).<br />
Many other police named on the warrant are respected and
senior detectives. The vast majority have never been told why they
appeared on the warrant, let alone questioned or charged.<br />
<br />
Emblems investigators said their inquiries were hampered
because the then head of the NSW Crime Commission, Phil Bradley, after
initially agreeing to co-operate, refused to hand over crucial
documents. These included affidavits which were presented to the Supreme
Court to support the application for the listening device.<br />
<br />
Strike force investigators, which included five detective
inspectors, clearly found themselves under intense pressure and took the
extraordinary step of recording their fears that they may be subject to
"payback''.<br />
<br />
"Although there is no evidence of a 'payback' or 'reprisal',
the nature of the Strike Force Emblems investigation, with the alleged
corruption identified, indicates there is a potential for retribution
against Strike Force members," the Emblems report said.<br />
<br />
Investigators also reveal they were directed to be less than
truthful with the 35 people who formally complained about their names
being on the warrant.<br />
<br />
It says they were "instructed" to tell complainants ''we are working towards obtaining the affidavit''.<br />
"At no time have the complainants been informed that the
affidavit has been refused or that the Crime Commission is being
obstructive."<br />
<br />
<em>The Sun-Herald</em> asked Mr Scipione, Ms Burn and Mr Kaldas for comment.<br />
<br />
Through a spokesman, Mr Kaldas said he was "unable to comment".<br />
<br />
Ms Burn did not wish to comment, except to say she had never been the commander of SCIA.<br />
<br />
The Police Commissioner, Andrew Scipione, said: ''All matters
relating to Strike Force Emblems and any associated materials have been
referred to the Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission. NSW
Police has provided all materials asked for by the inspector.''</div>
<div class="cT-imageLandscape">
</div>
</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3816628964886325611.post-61525277269286783322012-09-09T01:09:00.000-07:002013-08-27T01:20:20.278-07:00Strike Force Emblems 7.30 Show <style>@font-face {
font-family: "Times New Roman";
}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal { margin: 0cm 0cm 0.0001pt; font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman"; }table.MsoNormalTable { font-size: 10pt; font-family: "Times New Roman"; }div.Section1 { page: Section1; }</style>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-size: large;"><b>Welcome to '7.30' NSW. </b></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: Times; font-size: 10pt;">Start 29-09-2012 05:59 AM</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span lang="EN-US" style="font-family: Times; font-size: 10pt;">End 29-09-2012 06:33 AM</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I'm Quentin Dempster. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200902/r341942_1556988.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://www.abc.net.au/reslib/200902/r341942_1556988.jpg" height="320" width="212" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Quentin Dempster</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;adv=yes;orderBy=date-eLast;page=1;query=%22strike%2Bforce%2BEmblems%22;rec=2;resCount=Default"><b>Tonight - Wire tap wronged, senior police still fuming over being named in covert surveillance warrants. There is no legitimate reason why they were on that warrant.</b></a></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br />
There is a big integrity test coming for the O'Farrell Government and its
oversight body the Police Integrity Commission. It concerns an old wound,
bitterly hurt feelings among many senior police with unblemished service
records and the integrity of the system itself. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The current inspector of the police integrity commission,
David Levine QC has been asked by the Government to consider the public release
of what's called the Emblems Report into the alleged abuse of covert
surveillance search warrants dating back 12 years. The warrants, some regularly
reissued with the approval of judges, named 114 serving and former police and
some civilians. Many want a judicial inquiry to clear the air. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
What is all this about? It has suppressed been secret for 10
years and suppressed by successive State Governments, when you read it you can
understand why they want to suppress it. It casts into doubt the role of
special crime and internal affairs, the NSW Crime Commission and the Police
Integrity Commission and it casts questions on the Supreme Court of NSW. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It is little wonder they don't want this out.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://ten.com.au/tvshows/images/Neil_Mercer_280%281%29.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://ten.com.au/tvshows/images/Neil_Mercer_280(1).jpg" height="200" width="143" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Neil Mercer</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This is the contentious affidavit leaked to veteran Sydney
crime reporter <a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/bugging-bombshell-as-secret-files-revealed-20120908-25l0k.html">Neil Mercer of the 'Sun Herald'</a>. Under the name of an officer
attached to the NSW Crime Commission, it lists dozens of names and in marked
paragraphs, describes the evidentiary leads and roar intelligence the officer
relied on to persuade a Supreme Court judge in 2000 to approve listening device
warrants. In an operation said to be needed to expose police corruption, an
already self confessed corrupt police officer, code named M5, a registered
crime commission informant was wired for sound for two and a half years and
tried to engage his targets in private conversations. </div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://www.hcourt.gov.au/assets/justices/bellj.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://www.hcourt.gov.au/assets/justices/bellj.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Virginia Bell </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This is the affidavit which was presented to <a href="http://www.hcourt.gov.au/justices/current/justice-bell">Virginia Bell</a>
in the NSW Supreme Court and, as you can see, dozens and dozens of names on it,
in fact there is about 114 names on this particular document. Some of them
deserve to be there. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
There is dozens who should never have been on this document
and you come down to people. Look at Ken Mackay is now an assistant
commissioner, no reason why he should be on this document. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
You come over the page, dozens of names and you look down
here, Nick Caldas is now the deputy NSW commissioner. No reason why he should
be on the document. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Respected detectives, Wayne Hayes, no reason why he should
be there. Neil Mercer and his police sources have analysed the names. The
warrant names about 114 serving and former police and a couple of civilians.
Basically, six police out of that 114 went to jail, fair enough, there is no
question, some of those names, some of the people on the warrant were corrupt.
I think about another eight police left the police force. Really, the vast
majority, it appears there is no legitimate reason why they were on that
warrant. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Even an internal NSW police investigation into it said in
their view that at least 54 of those 114 names should not have been on that
warrant. There was no legitimate reason why they should ever been there, no
proof and what I have been told is that some of them were there for people as
get squares, personal vein debt Yass and some of the names on that warrant were
there on third, fourth, fifth hand hearsay. Covert operations using listening
devices under the code name Mascot, gathered probative evidence of corruption
but some innocent police became suspicious when they were visited by M5 on
various pretexts. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This was the era after the 1990s Wood Royal Commission
established endemic corruption existed within the force. That commission was successful,
largely because of covert surveillance.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In 2002, police corruption involving the drug trade on
Sydney's northern beaches was sensationally exposed, again through successful
covert surveillance in a joint agency operation called Florida. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But in 2004,
following complaints from the police association and some of the aggrieved
officers with unblemished service records named in the affidavit, then police
commissioner Ken Moroney established <a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3816628964886325611" name="HIT1"></a>Strike Force Emblems to
inquire into the alleged criminal misuse of the warrants.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://images.smh.com.au/2012/09/22/3657481/art-353-secret-20police-300x0.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://images.smh.com.au/2012/09/22/3657481/art-353-secret-20police-300x0.jpg" height="320" width="218" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Deputy Commissioner Cath Burn </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Emblems, overseen by senior police investigators reported
with recommendations for further investigation on 25 August 2005.This is what
all the fuss is about. This is the emblems report. Investigators say they were
unable to complete their inquiries into the contentious affidavit because of
the secrecy provisions of the NSW Crime Commission which prevented interviews
and evidence from all officers oversighting and conducting the surveillance
operation. conducting the M5 covert surveillance operation. Key finding said... <a href="https://www.blogger.com/blogger.g?blogID=3816628964886325611" name="HIT4"></a>established Strike Force Emblems recommended the
removal of the Crime Commission's secrecy provisions to the extent necessary so
a thorough investigation could be completed. </div>
<div style="text-align: left;">
</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Seven years later no action has been taken on the emblems
recommendation. Now, the leaking of the </div>
affidavit and other material to the
print media has reignited the hurt. At stake seems to be the standing of
current Deputy Commissioner Nick Caldas, in line for the top job when the
current commissioner retires soon. Also affected as another potential
commissioner, current Deputy Commissioner Cath <br />
Burn. She was once a part of the
special crime unit which oversaw the covert operations with other agencies.<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
It has been reported investigation into the leaking of
material to Neil Mercer and other’s. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Tell us, who leaked it to you? </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
You know I won't tell you that and never would. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2011/05/19/1226058/874793-o-039-farrell.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://resources1.news.com.au/images/2011/05/19/1226058/874793-o-039-farrell.jpg" height="180" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Premier Barry O'Farrell</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In May this year, Premier Barry O'Farrell, as minister now
responsible for the Police Integrity Commission wrote to David Levine inspector
of the PIC. <br />
<br />
David Levine declined our request for an on camera interview.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
We would like to post our copy of the emblems report and
other documents on our web site to let some sun shine onto this dispute but on
legal advice, we can't, but on legal advice, we can't. Greens MLC David
Shoebridge said he can't, Shoebridge said he would consider tabling
appropriately redacted documents under parliamentary privilege if the
Government didn't act soon.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This ongoing controversy is putting in question the faith of
senior police and the faith of the public. We need to have someone cut through.
At the moment we have the Police Integrity Commission, the Crime Commission,
internal affairs, all potentially involved in the matters under inquiry. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
None of them can conduct an independent inquiry. We need an
independent judicial inquiry to cut through. The usually camera-friendly
minister for police Mike Gallagher declined to be interviewed. </div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Opposition police spokesman and former Premier Nathan Reece
says Emblems was problematic for the former Government because its release could
identify informants who fingered the corrupt. If such sensitive information
could be excluded -I think it is important for the public that this be released,
this document.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
More complaints are coming I am told. Such is the anger in
the NSW police force that this dead cat, as it is being called by senior police,
will continue to stink up the policing of this State until the air is cleared.</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3816628964886325611.post-12804985066003303432012-08-27T04:16:00.000-07:002013-08-26T04:17:28.982-07:00NSW govt won't release surveillance report <a href="http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/dont-release-emblems-nsw-pic-inspector/story-e6frf7kf-1226525178509"><strong>THE NSW government will not release a report into a high-level internal police surveillance operation, saying the police integrity watchdog has found the investigation unsatisfactory. </strong></a><br />
<strong> </strong>
<br />
Police Integrity Commission (PIC) Inspector David Levine warned
that releasing the Strike Force Emblems report would be "dangerous" and
damage the reputation of NSW police.<br />
<br />
Strike Force Emblems was
established to investigate the propriety of an internal police operation
in 2000, which put 114 people, including police and lawyers, under
surveillance.<br />
<br />
Some of those police are now in the top ranks of the force, including deputy commissioner Nick Kaldas.<br />
<br />
Police and their union have called for the Emblems report to be released to protect the reputation of honest officers.<br />
<br />
However,
after being asked by Premier Barry O'Farrell to determine whether the
report should be made public, PIC Inspector David Levine was damning.<br />
<div class="story-related story-sidebar block-style">
<br />
</div>
The former Supreme Court Justice wrote in a letter to Police
Minister Michael Gallacher on November 23 that he had found the report
"to be such an abstruse and unsatisfactory internal police document that
it is not in the public interest for it, its findings ... and its
recommendations ... to be made public".<br />
<br />
He wrote: "There is a
grave risk to the reputation of not only the NSW Police as an
institution but also of many named persons by false perceptions flowing
from publication as well as inevitable speculations which would be
fruitless as they would be dangerous."<br />
<br />
Recommending the Emblems
report and his review of it not be released, Mr Levine said it was not a
question of avoiding public scrutiny.<br />
<br />
"But rather of the
operation of a transcending public interest in the fair and considered
protection of the good name of the NSW Police," he wrote.<br />
<br />
Mr Gallacher told reporters a line should be drawn under the "flawed" Emblems investigation.<br />
In
opposition Mr Gallacher had called for the release of Emblems, but
having read in government what he said were its inconsistent
recommendations, he had changed his mind.<br />
<br />
He said the Ombudsman
should now be allowed to conduct his investigation into the original
surveillance operations and Strike Force Emblems.<br />
<br />
"We've got to
finally come to a point that says let's rule a line under Emblems, let's
stop holding it up as somehow being a model of an internal
investigation, let's (give) the Ombudsman the opportunity to go about
and do this investigation once and for all properly," Mr Gallacher said.<br />
<br />
He said it was now for the Ombudsman to look not only at Mr Levine's report "but indeed the entirety of this matter".<br />
<br />
The
Police Association of NSW said the recommendation not to release the
2004 Emblems report was "disappointing and completely unsatisfactory",
and defended the officers involved in the investigation.<br />
"Today's
announcement does not address the key reasons why there was an
investigation in the first place," Association President Scott Weber
said in a statement.<br />
<br />
"It is completely unacceptable for (Mr
Levine) to wipe his hands of responsibility and shift the responsibility
to the Ombudsman."<br />
<br />
Greens MP David Shoebridge accused the government of "hiding key information from the public".<br />
"More
than a hundred people had their phones bugged it would appear with
almost no grounds to support that," Mr Shoebridge told AAP.<br />
<br />
"Those
people include senior police, journalists and lawyers (and) any society
should be troubled when their police can go and get such extraordinary
powers with little more than a rubber stamp from the Supreme Court."Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3816628964886325611.post-22977068239328825212012-08-26T04:10:00.000-07:002013-08-26T04:10:58.135-07:00Report of the Inspector of the Police Integrity Commission into Strike Force Emblems27th November 2012<br />
<br /><div style="font-size: 0.85em;">
<a href="http://www.mpes.nsw.gov.au/newsarticle.html?newsid=736">Ministerial media release</a></div>
<br />
The NSW Government has received the report from the PIC Inspector of his review of the Strike Force Emblems Report.<br />
<br />
The Inspector has found that the Strike Force Emblems Report is of such
an unsatisfactory standard that its public release cannot be found to be
in the public interest.<br />
<br />
The Inspector has recommended against the release of either the Strike Force Emblems Report, or his own report into this matter.<br />
<br />
The Inspector states: "I advise against the publication of the Strike Force Emblems Report and my Report and Review of it.<br />
<br />
The Inspector was asked to consider whether it was in the public
interest to release the Emblems report. The Inspector has found,
emphatically, that it is not.<br />
<br />
The Inspector states: "This is not a question of the avoidance of public
scrutiny but rather of the operation of a transcending public interest
in the fair and considered protection of the good name of the NSW
Police, of those who serve in it and of other members of the community.<br />
<br />
The Inspector notes that he has referred to the NSW Ombudsman all of the
matters that have emerged since the initial referral of this matter to
the Inspector back in May of this year.<br />
<br />
The Government has committed to giving the Ombudsman the powers he needs to provide closure to this matter.<br />
<br />
This is a commitment the Government has honoured with the introduction
and passage of the Ombudsman Amendment Bill 2012 which provides
additional powers requested by the Ombudsman to undertake this
investigation.<br />
<br />
The Government supports the recommendations of the Inspector, and will
continue to support the efforts of the Ombudsman to bring some
resolution to this decade old matter.<br />
<br />
The NSW Liberals & Nationals Government has been proper and
transparent in its dealing of this issue and we look forward to the
findings from the Ombudsman.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3816628964886325611.post-7795495890177273132012-05-27T04:38:00.000-07:002013-08-29T04:39:07.081-07:00O'Farrell to reopen police bugging case<h4 class="authorTitle">
<a href="http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/ofarrell-to-reopen-police-bugging-case-20120526-1zblm.html">Heath Aston</a></h4>
<h4 class="authorTitle">
Political reporter</h4>
<h4 class="authorTitle">
27 May 2012 </h4>
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: right; margin-left: 1em; text-align: right;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://images.smh.com.au/2012/05/26/3328584/art-353-a19-20Barry-20O-Farrell-200x0.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="http://images.smh.com.au/2012/05/26/3328584/art-353-a19-20Barry-20O-Farrell-200x0.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Premier, Barry O'Farrell</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
THE workings of the former internal affairs branch of the NSW Police
could be laid bare, with the Premier, Barry O'Farrell, set to call a
public inquiry into the decade-old scandal over the bugging of senior
police.<br />
<br />
The Premier is understood to be concerned at why a report into Strike
Force Emblems has remained buried since 2004 despite renewed calls for
its release by honest officers who were targeted for surveillance.<br />
<br />
Emblems investigated a secret operation in which a former corrupt
policeman, codenamed M5, used a listening device to gather evidence
against colleagues in 2000.<br />
<br />
There was fury when it later emerged in unrelated court cases that M5's
targets spanned all levels of the force, including officers with
impeccable records.<br />
<br />
<br />
Nick Kaldas - a deputy commissioner - Bob Inkster, then commander of
Taskforce Gain, Mike Hagan, Brian Harding and Dennis Gilligan, now a
lawyer, were among those approved for bugging. A lawyer and journalist,
Steve Barrett, were also on the list.<br />
<br />
A source said Mr O'Farrell was ''very concerned'' about the bugging
claims and ''may try to give the matter a more extensive airing''. It is
believed that would take the form of a special commission of inquiry.<br />
<br />
Mr Harding, who left the force in 1996 as a detective superintendent,
and at least five other former police are seeking legal advice about a
potential class action to force answers on Emblems.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0