why do cops try?

Joined: 27 Nov 2002 Location: Lost in Melbourne.

Remember that kiddies, if your under 18, you can bash cops and only get a warning? Shocked

Quote:

MySpace teen party runs wild
September 2, 2008 - 11:45AM

A wild teenage party promoted on MySpace has been condemned by police in Victoria who were pelted with glass bottles when they tried to close it down.

Sergeant Mick Ryan, of Geelong police, said one drunken youth was arrested after trying to king-hit a female police officer as the party in Belmont spilled into the street.

Every available police unit in the area was called after the backyard party - being hosted by a 16-year-old and his mother - got out of control in Tettenhall Ridge on Saturday.

"It was just a big party, full of underage drunks in the backyard and the street was littered with lots of broken bottles so we decided to close it down," Sergeant Ryan said.

"There was one drunk adult 'supervising' and the backyard was chocker from fence to fence full of kids aged 14 to 18."

Sergeant Ryan said he was in a van with five police officers who were called in as back up after other officers in a police van were unable to stop the party following complaints from neighbours.

He said as he and fellow officers cleared the backyard a fight broke out in the street and when police tried to stop the scuffle the crowd turned on officers.

"We stepped in to break it up and one youth started swinging at a policewoman so we arrested him," he said.

"When the fight started bottles started being thrown at us, full bottles of alcohol."

Police were forced to retreat and wait for back up before clearing the streets of drunken revellers.

"If they are underage you have to give them the option of a caution," he said.

Two more youths were arrested for being drunk but will not face charges.

Sergeant Ryan said the mother of the party's host had been spoken to but was heavily intoxicated and unco-operative with police.

He said police were able to shut down parties but it was difficult to charge people with offences.

He said some parents who had come to collect their children were shocked to find out what kind of party they had been attending.

"It was going well until some young blokes started to fight and tried to take us on and then it just exploded," he said.

"I feel sorry for some of the young kids who were terrified by what happened.

"It was like when you drop a stone in a pond and the ripples go out, it just went 'boom'."

Geelong Chief Inspector Wayne Carson said promoting teenage parties on the internet only fuelled the chance for violence and drunkenness.

"We just think it's totally irresponsible to do that and discourage people from holding 16-18-year-old parties in their backyards, particularly if they are going to advertise on MySpace," he said.

"It is terribly irresponsible and, in my view, if you have to have those sorts of parties in your backyard at least take the precaution of having a number of supervisors who are sober."

"Vans came from Geelong, Corio, Portarlington ... every available unit came to help ... it was the lion's share of police resources," Sergeant Ryan said.

It is understood the 16th birthday party had been advertised on social networking site MySpace.

A 17-year-old male was arrested for drunkenness and assaulting a police officer but Sergeant Ryan said because he was underage he had only been cautioned.

Joined: 25 Oct 2003 Location: Melbourne Australia

bogged wrote:

Remember that kiddies, if your under 18, you can bash cops and only get a warning? Shocked

Quote:

A 17-year-old male was arrested for drunkenness and assaulting a police officer but Sergeant Ryan said because he was underage he had only been cautioned.

That is stupid. The article is implying that a "caution" is all the police can do in this case, which is complete rubbish.

Joined: 29 May 2003 Location: hidin frm da wiminz!!!

this is why I am not a police officer.... I would have shot someone.

Joined: 05 Feb 2005 Location: Check your six.

Grounds for cautioning:

For an offender to be eligible to receive a caution, all the following criteria must be met:•
identity of the offender must be verified
there must be sufficient admissible evidence to establish the offence
the offender must admit the offence
generally the offender should have no prior criminal history
and in the case of a child offender the parent/guardian, must consent to the caution

a caution must be appropriate in the circumstances. Shocked

Depending on the evidence ( and I don't know its strength or circumstance) then perhaps the offender met the criteria as laid down in the Manual for Child Cautioning.

Perhaps.

Posted: Tue Sep 02, 2008 2:16 pm

The police standards in Vic must be slipping.

They should have just shot them. Laughing

Joined: 25 Oct 2003 Location: Melbourne Australia

RoadNazi wrote:

Grounds for cautioning:

For an offender to be eligible to receive a caution, all the following criteria must be met:•
identity of the offender must be verified
there must be sufficient admissible evidence to establish the offence
the offender must admit the offence
generally the offender should have no prior criminal history
and in the case of a child offender the parent/guardian, must consent to the caution

a caution must be appropriate in the circumstances. Shocked

Depending on the evidence ( and I don't know its strength or circumstance) then perhaps the offender met the criteria as laid down in the Manual for Child Cautioning.

Perhaps.

Nothing on the severity of the offence?

Joined: 05 Feb 2005 Location: Check your six.

chimpboy wrote:

RoadNazi wrote:

Grounds for cautioning:

For an offender to be eligible to receive a caution, all the following criteria must be met:•
identity of the offender must be verified
there must be sufficient admissible evidence to establish the offence
the offender must admit the offence
generally the offender should have no prior criminal history
and in the case of a child offender the parent/guardian, must consent to the caution

a caution must be appropriate in the circumstances. Shocked

Depending on the evidence ( and I don't know its strength or circumstance) then perhaps the offender met the criteria as laid down in the Manual for Child Cautioning.

Perhaps.

Nothing on the severity of the offence?

Would relate to whether it was appropriate in the circumstances. That is the measure. Serious assault...doubt it...Minor, probably.

Joined: 27 Nov 2002 Location: Lost in Melbourne.

GRIMACE wrote:

this is why I am not a police officer.... I would have shot someone.

Im with you. This'll learn ya...

RoadNazi wrote:

the offender must admit the offence .

Yea?

Joined: 31 May 2005 Location: Sydney

A 17yo male who thinks it's ok to swing at a female, and all he gets is a caution?

Surely what is appropriate is that he is taken around the corner and given a flogging and taught about why swinging at women is wrong.......and then cautioned.

Man, if I had been cautioned for throwing at a female when I was 17, my Dad would have beat 8 colours of piss out of me. Then my mates would have.

Joined: 25 Oct 2003 Location: Melbourne Australia

bogged wrote:

RoadNazi wrote:

the offender must admit the offence .

Yea?

The point being that in the absence of an admission they won't get a caution, and hopefully they'll get charged? I assume they don't want to be issuing cautions when it hasn't been properly established that the offence occurred at all, either through agreement of the parties or through proof in open court.

I think that's overall fair enough but in the case of assualting a police officer it has gone beyond a caution and proper action should be taken. That's a person with a dangerous future imho.

Joined: 30 Apr 2003 Location: In the Goatshed in Melbourne

v840 wrote:

A 17yo male who thinks it's ok to swing at a female, and all he gets is a caution?

Surely what is appropriate is that he is taken around the corner and given a flogging and taught about why swinging at women is wrong.......and then cautioned.

Man, if I had been cautioned for throwing at a female when I was 17, my Dad would have beat 8 colours of piss out of me. Then my mates would have.

Society has gone downhill since the Yellowpages went online Crying or Very sad

The "mum" is obviously a model citizen and role model for the kids cussing

Joined: 23 Jun 2004

Thats what I like about QLD,
17 years is adult and the adult penalties apply.

Joined: 05 Feb 2005 Location: Check your six.

toaddog wrote:

Thats what I like about QLD,
17 years is adult and the adult penalties apply.

and it nevers rains in CAirns....not. Very Happy

17yr olds were adults in the system till recently...now an adult is 18 plus.

Joined: 27 Nov 2002 Location: Lost in Melbourne.

AJFeroza wrote:

The "mum" is obviously a model citizen and role model for the kids cussing

wat he said...
hope they send her the bill...........

Joined: 10 Nov 2007 Location: Coffs Harbour

v840 wrote:

A 17yo male who thinks it's ok to swing at a female, and all he gets is a caution?

Surely what is appropriate is that he is taken around the corner and given a flogging and taught about why swinging at women is wrong.......and then cautioned.

Man, if I had been cautioned for throwing at a female when I was 17, my Dad would have beat 8 colours of piss out of me. Then my mates would have.

And thats the difference in Society now.

Take a swing at the Police and your a hero.

If the Police hit back they are being heavy handed.

Joined: 27 Nov 2002 Location: Lost in Melbourne.

v840 wrote:

, my Dad would have beat 8 colours of piss out of me. Then my mates would have.

an but now kids know their legal rights, and would divorce their parents, then sue them for everything they got, all in the name of enhancing the lawyers pockets.

Joined: 23 Jun 2004

RoadNazi wrote:

toaddog wrote:

Thats what I like about QLD,
17 years is adult and the adult penalties apply.

and it nevers rains in CAirns....not. Very Happy

17yr olds were adults in the system till recently...now an adult is 18 plus.

Check the criminal code. A person 17 years and older is criminally responsible. None of that 18 yrs plus crap.

Joined: 02 Jun 2004 Location: Melbourne

toaddog wrote:

Check the criminal code. A person 17 years and older is criminally responsible. None of that 18 yrs plus crap.

Bwahahahaha - you just told RN to check the criminal code!!! Tuesday Rules!!!!

Steve.

Joined: 09 Oct 2007 Location: geelong

damn where was our phone call. just over the bridge from me.

kids have no respect these days. need to lower the age of which they fall under adult laws to about 13, as thats the age when half of they start committing theft, drugs, stabbing etc

Joined: 05 Feb 2005 Location: Check your six.

toaddog wrote:

RoadNazi wrote:

toaddog wrote:

Thats what I like about QLD,
17 years is adult and the adult penalties apply.

and it nevers rains in CAirns....not. Very Happy

17yr olds were adults in the system till recently...now an adult is 18 plus.

Check the criminal code. A person 17 years and older is criminally responsible. None of that 18 yrs plus crap.

I was referring to Vic. The 17 year olds can't be dealt with anymore in the Magistrates Court and have to go to Neverland Court where everything is warm and cuddily wuddily.( except for serious mojo resulting in County or Supreme Court)

Joined: 30 Apr 2003 Location: In the Goatshed in Melbourne

AcTioN13 wrote:

damn where was our phone call. just over the bridge from me.

kids have no respect these days. need to lower the age of which they fall under adult laws to about 13, as thats the age when half of they start committing theft, drugs, stabbing etc

Yep, and that seems to work in the US.

I think we need a few things:

- The ability for families to choose to have a stay-at-home parent, and still be able to afford a house.

- Less US-style TV teaching our kids ALL about their RIGHTS from the first time they get plonked in front of the idiot box, and more teaching about their RESPONSIBILITIES to society.

- Less bullsh!t marketing maggots constantly pitching at us from every farkin' direction..

- The list goes on......

Joined: 14 Nov 2003 Location: Wollongong

What a stupid fwit the mother must be, "Boohoo, I hosted a party for a bunch of 16 year olds and lost control."
I don't understand, why does a 16y.o need to have a party anyway?? They are underage to drink what's wrong with waiting until they turn 18? #Silly

It's funny, mum was telling me about another situation like this that happened recently where a mother did the same thing threw a 16th and it turned into a trashing rampage. The mother had a good cry at the station too. Rolling Eyes

DUMB.

Joined: 27 Nov 2002 Location: Lost in Melbourne.

AJFeroza wrote:

AcTioN13 wrote:

damn where was our phone call. just over the bridge from me.

kids have no respect these days. need to lower the age of which they fall under adult laws to about 13, as thats the age when half of they start committing theft, drugs, stabbing etc

Yep, and that seems to work in the US.

I think we need a few things:

- The ability for families to choose to have a stay-at-home parent, and still be able to afford a house.

- Less US-style TV teaching our kids ALL about their RIGHTS from the first time they get plonked in front of the idiot box, and more teaching about their RESPONSIBILITIES to society.

- Less bullsh!t marketing maggots constantly pitching at us from every farkin' direction..

- The list goes on......

Im shocked.. that all makes sense... Shocked

Joined: 21 Jun 2004 Location: Brisbane

I think the law must allocate responsibility to someone.

And the "state" or the "commons" cannot be used as a the one responsible if no other can be found.

If a under-18 cannot be deemed responsible then find someone else - the parent(s) and/or other legally responsible family members. Can of worms I know.

Joined: 20 Oct 2002 Location: Greenbank

Gwagensteve wrote:

toaddog wrote:

Check the criminal code. A person 17 years and older is criminally responsible. None of that 18 yrs plus crap.

Bwahahahaha - you just told RN to check the criminal code!!! Tuesday Rules!!!!

Steve.

You do realise that RN isnt the only cop here Question

Joined: 03 Jan 2007 Location: Melbourne, Australia

RUFF wrote:

Gwagensteve wrote:

toaddog wrote:

Check the criminal code. A person 17 years and older is criminally responsible. None of that 18 yrs plus crap.

Bwahahahaha - you just told RN to check the criminal code!!! Tuesday Rules!!!!

Steve.

You do realise that RN isnt the only cop here Question

LOL glad someone said it

Joined: 23 Jun 2004

Gwagensteve wrote:

toaddog wrote:

Check the criminal code. A person 17 years and older is criminally responsible. None of that 18 yrs plus crap.

Bwahahahaha - you just told RN to check the criminal code!!! Tuesday Rules!!!!

Steve.

Well yeah I would cause I was talking about Qld legislation and age of responsibility and bruce is talking about your mexican laws

Joined: 06 Apr 2007 Location: Cambridge Park

RUFF wrote:

Gwagensteve wrote:

toaddog wrote:

Check the criminal code. A person 17 years and older is criminally responsible. None of that 18 yrs plus crap.

Bwahahahaha - you just told RN to check the criminal code!!! Tuesday Rules!!!!

Steve.

You do realise that RN isnt the only cop here Question

There are cops here? Shocked

Joined: 18 Nov 2006 Location: Boganville

lump_a_charcoal wrote:

RUFF wrote:

Gwagensteve wrote:

toaddog wrote:

Check the criminal code. A person 17 years and older is criminally responsible. None of that 18 yrs plus crap.

Bwahahahaha - you just told RN to check the criminal code!!! Tuesday Rules!!!!

Steve.

You do realise that RN isnt the only cop here Question

There are cops here? Shocked

Dont worry, hes cool, unless you date his daughter, then he has the legal right to shoot you.

Joined: 14 Oct 2007 Location: Perth, WA

Bring back corporal punishment in schools.

Kept me inline…

Also the fact that if I as much thought of…

a. hitting a female
b. being disrespectful to others (not only the police)
c. became an outright little . and treated others like shit.

My Dad would have beat seven shades of sh!t out of me.

These days kids can get away with anything. When told to pull their heads in, they turn around all cocky and say 'What are you going to do about it?' Because they know you can't lay a finger on them.