By: ausbadcops
2/08/2009
1:30 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ausbadcops Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
21 February, 2009
2 Uniformed officers arrived at my front door and called out to me.
I went out to see what they wanted.
SENCON SIMON FOGARTY wanted to hand me some papers, so I asked what "What name is on those papers?".
SENCON SIMON FOGARTY replied "Yours"
I replied "How is the name spelt?"
SENCON SIMON FOGARTY looked at the papers but gave no reply.
I then said to SENCON SIMON FOGARTY "What date of birth do you have on those papers?"
SENCON SIMON FOGARTY then looked at the papers and found there was no date of birth.
The name on the papers had similar last name to mine, but it was not mine.
The address on the papers was a common address used by many as it is the street address of a caravan park.
I then said to SENCON SIMON FOGARTY "These papers are not for me - that is not my name on them. Good bye.
I then walked back inside my home and closed the door.
CON MARK PUGLISI then opened my front door, stepped inside and threw the papers on my floor.
I then told CON MARK PUGLISI "You are not permitted to enter my home without a warrant, I am going to report you.
CON MARK PUGLISI then tried to intimidate me by standing "too close in my face"
I told CON MARK PUGLISI to "Get out and get off my site".
I then heard Officer Foggerty say something to CON MARK PUGLISI and they both walked onto the caravan park roadway outside my site and stood there looking at my partners car and writing down details.
I then locked my front door.
A short time later the 2 officers drove off.
After they had left, I went outside to find that they had left the papers they came to serve, jammed in my door.
Looking at the papers one can see clearly that the name is different, there is no date of birth, and the address is not even complete.
How could such papers be served on anyone like that? |
|
By: ausbadcops
2/08/2009
1:34 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ausbadcops Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Next Up...
On Sunday 29/03/2009 at 4:45pm both SENCON SIMON FOGARTY and CON MARK PUGLISI attended my home and knocked on the door.
I answered the door and CON MARK PUGLISI said to me "You recall an incident here at the park this morning?"
I replied "What do you mean?"
CON MARK PUGLISI replied "You are now under arrest for assault - And now I'm coming in!"
CON MARK PUGLISI then came inside followed by SENCON SIMON FOGARTY
CON MARK PUGLISI then said to me "Grab your things and come with me."
I asked "What things do I need to bring with me?"
CON MARK PUGLISI replied "Grab some ID, have you got your drivers licence?"
I thought at the time that it seemed to be a strange request, so I asked "What do you need that for?"
CON MARK PUGLISI replied "Just so I can confirm your identity."
I then moved further inside, away from the front door and said to my partner Chris to grab my wallet.
Chris then stated "Why are you arresting him, Grahame didn't do anything?"
SENCON SIMON FOGARTY replied "Where just taking him up to the station to ask him a few questions."
Upon hearing this I became further suspicous of the whole situation as CON MARK PUGLISI had already placed me under arrest.
My partner then gave me my drivers licence and I was then placed in the back of the police van and transported to the Nimbin Police Station and then placed in the holding cell. The time was 4:45pm.
At around 7:00pm I was charged with Common Assault. I was then given bail and released at 7:30pm.
The charges against me have been based on the evidence of the VICTIM's statement only.
I believe CON MARK PUGLISI had a personal agenda - to victimise me for my earlier complaint - and was out to arrest me, no matter what.
According to CON MARK PUGLISI "Lepra Safe" guards were applied before the accused was placed under arrest. This is not correct. I was placed under arrest from the first instant.
I wanted to speak to a solicitor - to which I was never given the opportunity to do so. |
|
By: ausbadcops
2/08/2009
1:35 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ausbadcops Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
On Friday 31 July 2009, I appeared before Magistrate P A Lyon in the local court at Lismore NSW on 2 charges:
1. Common Assault
2. Intimidation
The prosecution tendered 3 statements as evidence
One statement was from the alleged victim
The other two statements were from the arresting police officers.
No other evidence was tendered.
The whole prosecution case was based solely on the victims statement.
My defense was that I did not assault the victim.
The Magistrate would not allow me to cross examine the police regarding their statements.
Somehow, I was found guilty..?
In the Magistrates summing up, everything he said pointed to balance of probabilities.
It was clear, there was no evidence to prove that an assault actually took place.
The Magistrate actually pointed out that because he thought that I was a "highly strung" person that that itself was evidence that the assault took place.
This finding was based on the Magistrate's observation of myself in the court room.
I really don't understand what has happened here. One would have thought that the case would have been dismissed at the start of the hearing considering the police did not have any evidence to present..?
It is clear that this is a wrongful conviction and I have lodged an appeal to the District Court.
My real problem here is with the actual Magistrate.
At what point does a Magistrate become accountable if it is clear that they did not follow the law?
Does anyone check on Magistrate's mental health as they get older in life to ensure that they are still fit mentally to be serving on the bench?
You really need to read the transcripts of my case to see for yourself just what the Magistrate gave as his reasons for convicting me. |
|
By: ausgal952753
3/08/2009
4:33 pm Yahoo! Profile:
ausgal952753 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
Magistrates are fairly braindead people who tend to let people off very lightly anyway.
You were probably convicted regardless of your innocence/guilt to assist the police in preventing other assaults.
I suggest you cop it sweet and let it go.
Do you have any prior convictions etc. that may hae influenced the magistrate. |
|
By: sumo_cerberus_sumo
5/08/2009
5:55 am Yahoo! Profile:
sumo_cerberus_sumo Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| There are many types of law,A law for the rich A law for the people with no money,and the police have there own law,so if you are rich with lots of money,you can get away with murder,and the same if you are with the police,but not so if you have no money,no money you can be easy put into a situation where you are to be put up as a patsy,and pay the time for the rich. |
|
By: michelle_lucas76
7/11/2009
7:41 pm Yahoo! Profile:
michelle_lucas76 Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| I would like to you know what happened....I know someone who is going through something similar???? |
|
By: c.blogger_au
7/11/2009
7:50 pm Yahoo! Profile:
c.blogger_au Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| The sooner we accept that police are gods the sooner we can give up on a free society. |
|
By: c.blogger_au
7/11/2009
8:30 pm Yahoo! Profile:
c.blogger_au Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| "cop it sweet". And that is how the loss of freedom starts. |
|
By: ill_be_back@rocketmail.com
8/11/2009
9:15 am Yahoo! Profile:
ill_be_back@rocketmail.com Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
| The really scarey thing is that because many sheeple have been lucky enough to avoid dealing with porkers, they blindly assume that all swine are straight. As we've seen in Queensland, the whole Queensland Porker Service is rotten to he core & the maggots are having a lovely feast. I don't believe any 'good' cop could possibly be unaware of misconduct, & the failure to expose corruption renders them just as culpable as the actually offenders. |
|
By: ill_be_back@rocketmail.com
8/11/2009
9:18 am Yahoo! Profile:
ill_be_back@rocketmail.com Did this message offend you?
Sign in to report abuse |
Reply to this message |
The sooner we accept that police are gods the sooner we can give up on a free society.
Dunno about gods (not yet anway), although they are certainly working on it. They definitely consider their job description includes the roles of judge, jury & executioner. |
|
