Mobile Speed Cameras -- Cynical Revenue Raising...

How stupid does the New South Wales government think the citizens of this fine state are? I have nothing against reducing the road toll, I have nothing against the idea of people being required to drive at the speed limit or getting fined if the exceed it. However, the idea that the introduction of mobile speed cameras in NSW is anything other than a revenue raising drive to fill holes in the budget is an attempt to pull the wool over the eyes of NSW motorists.

Call me a cynic, but whenever the camera is set up to photograph you first and then notify you that your speed has been recorded is not a behavioural modification exercise in encouraging people to slow down, but rather it is a blatant exercise in raising revenue. So, when the NSW Minister of Transport gets up and says, "(But) certainly we'd be happy if not a single dollar, not a single cent were raised from digital mobile speed cameras," then you know he is telling fibs.

The reality is that the NSW government includes in its budget monies that it anticipates in collecting from speeding fines. To this end, the 2010/2011 budget papers estimate that there will be an increase of some AUD 137 million in fine revenue. The only real significant change in collection is the introduction of covert mobile speed cameras.

As I said, call me a cynic, but...

Getting it Wrong -- Should the Police Apologise?

It is good form to apologise when you make a mistake. However, to apologise, you must first acknowledge that you have made a mistake, then publicly state that you have made a mistake, and then say that very simple word, 'sorry'.

There is always two sides to any story. It would be interesting to see what the police's side of this story is because it must be good enough that it warranted the action that they took. Otherwise, there needs to be some disciplining taking place of the officers that allowed this case to go forward even after the mistake was identified and the realisation was made that this case would be dismissed.

The case is a simple one of over-zealous police failing to rectify a mistake once that mistake was identified. Lisa Maree Boersma, a swimwear designer and part-time model took a holiday to the US.

While she was there she left her car in the care of her boyfriend who just happens to be a bodybuilder. On her return from the US she found the drug squad police surrounding her car, a black BMW.

It turns out the drug police had discovered five one-kilogram bags of white powder and a kilogram of hydrophosphorous acid. To the over-zealous drug police this was already an open and shut case of commercial quantities of methylamphetamine.

This leads to an immediate arrest and charges of being a supplier. If convicted Boersma was looking down the barrel of 25 years in the slammer, bye bye and we will see you in your 50s!

In any event, Ms. Boersma spent 3 days in custody until she could secure bail. The police fought bail. And, to ensure that they could get bail overturned the police decided that they would expedite the powder testing process. The police were obviously very keen to put this beautiful young drug supplier behind bars as quickly as possible and for as long as possible. Nevertheless, this is where this case should have unraveled and the police called it a day.

The testing of the powder revealed that it was caffeine dimethyl sulfone. It sounds much scarier than it really is, but in essence it is nothing more than an over-the-counter caffeine supplement that bodybuilders use. Unfortunately, this is not where this case ended because the police decided that even though the supplement was one that can be legally obtained (red. not against the law to have it), they still needed to pursue this case and refused to drop the charges.

Ultimately, Chief Magistrate, Graeme Henson, of the Downing Centre Local Court took this out of the hands of the police and dismissed the case.

Ms. Boersma is now free to get on with her life. Unfortunately, she does not get to do this with an apology from the NSW Police Force.

Maybe it is time to see, read, and hear the police's version of this case. It would need to be good!

Thus endeth the sermon.

The Law and Online File Sharing -- An Australian Example

This case is really interesting for a number of reasons, but paramount among these is that of a law being designed for a particular purpose being literally interpreted and nabbing an unlikely victim. Law enforcement in Australia is generally pretty good. Like all other places there are times when one shakes their head in disgust or disbelief at how laws are interpreted and applied. This might just be one of those occasions where statutory interpretation goes a little bit awry.

Chris Illingworth, a seeming harmless 61-year-old from Maroochydore in Queensland has been charged with distributing child abuse materials over the internet (video capture of the event and inset of Illingworth from here). Illingworth came across a video of a man swinging a child by the arms and thought it worthy of being republished on Liveleak (video sharing site). The man and child in question are part of a circus troupe form Russia (or at least that is the belief) and perhaps this is what the Russians do, start the training of their youngsters and future circus performers at a very young age.

It must be noted that Illingworth has no criminal history relating to child abuse of any kind. An extensive search by police of his home and his computers turned up no images that would violate any provisions of current law.

The video certainly shows the child being swung around. There are probably arguments to be made for and against how violent the swinging is. However, the video ends with a smiling and laughing child.

Where this gets a little scary is the involvement of "experts" who get to offer opinions based on watching a video and through no interview of the alleged victim. In this case the police called in a specialist pediatrician, Susan Cadzow, from Royal Brisbane Children's Hospital. Now, in Cadzow's expert opinion this video represents child abuse and although no injury appears apparent this is irrelevant as there might be hidden injuries that will not manifest until some later time.

If police are going to charge people for this and then the Office of Public Prosecutions is going to proceed with a prosecution, then Australians should be forewarned and thus forearmed that the long arm of the law is gunning for you with seemingly endless powers of interpretation. The law though is helpful to the police as child abuse material "is, or appears to be, a victim of torture, cruelty or physical abuse" where the victim is appears to be under the age of 18.

What is helpful to police about this definition is that it does not require actual abuse to be taking place, it just has to be perceived as abuse and the police can take action.

This begs the question, would a video of say a child contortionist undergoing training and being videoed and then this video is uploaded to the internet constitute child abuse? Or even where the contortionist is performing for money, wouldn't this be child exploitation and subsequently abuse?

So, what were the police thinking in this case and why did they decide to proceed?

It seems that Illingworth is going to become an interesting test case. Although, I am sure Illingworth would rather not be the centre of any test case. Unfortunately, for him this is what he has become.

The case will certainly set a precedent, at least in the Australian jurisdiction, as to what constitutes child abuse and the enforcement of the provisions as they relate to viewing and uploading child abuse material. If the prosecution succeeds on this, then Illingworth is potentially looking at doing up to a maximum of ten years in prison for uploading a couple of circus performers, one of who was under the age of 18.

Scary.

Alleged Australian Sex Offender Arrested in Bali

Paul Francis Callahan fled Australia in 2003 headed for Bali after allegations surfaced that he had committed sex offences in Canberra.

Australian authorities learned of Callahan's whereabouts and placed a request with Indonesian Police to arrest him. The Indonesian Police granted the request and Callahan was arrested last Saturday in Kuta.

Callahan is currently in custody and awaiting an extradition hearing at the Denpasar District Court. By all accounts the hearing should be a mere formality.

Callahan on arrival in Bali has opened a surf gear business, married a local woman, and has a child with her. Strangely, this part of the tale sounds all too ordinary and is perhaps a case of evil living among us and we do not even know it!