Street workers

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RottenLittlePunt

Correct, up until the point they actually reveal themselves as police and attempt an actual arrest they are not utelising police powers. Use your brain for once in your life how could they be using police powers if they are undercover and pretending to not be police? Not sure whose point you were trying to prove, but thanks for proving mine for me.

As i keep stating, you're a total dimwit pseudo-intellectual. You quote Mark Twain to appear more intelligent than "your".

Let's see if you're smart enough to understand that ....

---

Are you a Solicitor?

Sent from my BAH3-L09 using Tapatalk

Is he legally required to tell you he is a solicitor if you ask? :question:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ecchi.gaijin

Is he legally required to tell you he is a solicitor if you ask? :question:

---

If he isn't his opinion on legal matters is about as valid as the other guy he's complaining about. Talk about bitter Cunts on this "forum"!

Sent from my BAH3-L09 using Tapatalk

Ahhh sir, the self importance of solicitors. The law is the culmination of ideas! The ideas of people, however these days, the self importance of solicitors believe they are the gatekeepers to these ideas. A member of parliament or a representative of the people doesn't have to be a solicitor! A solicitor only has to transcribe these ideas into a document. The police who are required to be undercover need to be able to operate without answering that question truthfully. That sir, is an idea! The solicitor is just the person who writes that idea down. Is the person correct sir? That is all that matters, not his professional qualifications.

Lets enjoy our punting!

Two types of people on this forum. Nerds like myself, socially awkward, who can only get a fuck by paying for it. And the other type. Previously referred to as " bitter cunts". Who also can only get a fuck by paying for it.
Why can't people be nice?

The Queen's Counsel has spoken:vomit:

Parse error: syntax error (T_STRING), user id 'NULL'

That experience turned you into a Gelding?

Parse error: syntax error (T_STRING), user id 'NULL'

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the gelding

Apart from my good fellows on here, I'm taking the following to the grave: The one and only time I've approached a street walker in Australia (blonde undercover police woman) was in 1998 (I was barely legal). The place (the valley), time and date (including court details two weeks later) are seared into my brain. The undercover cop told me to walk down the side street on my own and she would follow. Within 20m, an unmarked cop car pulled up and demanded me to stop. I shit my pants like you wouldn't believe. That's my only brush with the law. To say I shit myself is an understatement. I had finished my studies, had a crappy job and living with my parents. I was tempted because a dickhead (Matt - I couldn't stand him) I worked with mentioned he always see street walkers hanging around there. The police were sympathetic, I was 100% cooperative. I was almost bashed walking back to my car after leaving the police station (10:30pm). The wait till the court date was traumatic (almost stopped eating completely, I thought about this 24/7 leading up), as was the day. About 5 other blokes got caught. We all stood up together, we all pleaded guilty, and were fined $350 each without conviction (the court was like a production line - low level stuff, eg weed) . It literally took 90 seconds. They walked out in a group talking between themselves, I slunk out behind them in shame. I remember one old bloke saying, "I didn't even know it was illegal". Everyday after getting caught until well after the court date, I bought the paper early in the morning to see if I was mentioned. I can't describe the dread. There was write up about the sting, no individual names mentioned, but it was referred to as "Operation Ambush".

A few years after this (and many times since), I had to get police background check for a new job. This haunted me every time I changed workplaces. A little over ten years after the incident, I had to get a government security clearances for a new job. I never mentioned the incident (though I did shit myself) and it has never been a barrier. I've since carved out a niche and work for myself - it's highly unlikely I'll ever need another check (and I know it won't be an issue if I do). For a long time, it was my #1 life regret - I'm well and truly over it now. I actually wouldn't care now if people knew. At the time, I was worried about family finding out, the shame, and the impact it would have on my career. I've got a very high tolerance to stress, but fuck I felt the pressure during that period. In hindsight, it was irrational and an overreaction, but it didn't seem like it at the time. As mentioned, I was young, this was a one-off and I never contemplated the possibility of getting arrested growing up.

And that's my never before told story about street walkers in the valley in the 90s.

---

UNBELIEVABLE !!!

tell you what !!??!! i was one of the other 5. everything you said, i felt. i couldn't even eat properly all the way to the court date. at that time, i live in units, and every little sound at the door, i thought the cops were back to ask me more questions. it was a bloody nightmare. also, for the other people who were arguing and reading this, at that time, i asked the girl if she was an undercover cop. and she said no. and when the cop was writing me the court summons, i told them that i had asked the girl and that she had said she isn't a cop. the copper had the nerve to ask me, do you have a recording of the question that you asked the girl ?

on the day of the court appearance, i told the lawyer appointed to me, that it was entrapment. he told me it was difficult to prove, and if i used that as an excuse, and if i was found guilty anyway, they would record that incident as a conviction against me. the lawyer asked me if i still wanted to go ahead with the entrapment defence but strongly advised against it. my fine was $ 350

"The law in Australia
Unlike our common law counterparts in the US, there is no defence of entrapment available under Australian law."

https://www.findlaw.com.au/articles/...stralian%20law.

There's another aspect none brought up as part of undercover operations, they are given a warrant or a commission to perform the duties undercover and can withhold their employment status as a police officer if asked "are you a cop?" in the act of their duties.

best is don't do anything illegal, and if you do, try not to get caught.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RottenLittlePunt

Correct, up until the point they actually reveal themselves as police and attempt an actual arrest they are not utelising police powers. Use your brain for once in your life how could they be using police powers if they are undercover and pretending to not be police? Not sure whose point you were trying to prove, but thanks for proving mine for me.
As i keep stating, you're a total dimwit pseudo-intellectual. You quote Mark Twain to appear more intelligent than "your".
Let's see if you're smart enough to understand that ....

---

"up until the point they actually reveal themselves as police and attempt an actual arrest they are not utelising police powers"
"how could they be using police powers if they are undercover and pretending to not be police?"

So if a police officer is conducting an undercover operation he is not really a police officer with no police powers, until they reveal themselves.

Classic!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by harry444

Two types of people on this forum. Nerds like myself, socially awkward, who can only get a fuck by paying for it. And the other type. Previously referred to as " bitter cunts". Who also can only get a fuck by paying for it.
Why can't people be nice?

---

Because harry444 some people weren't successful in life and are just bitter at the world. Their only misguided pleasure is to get on forums like this and put shit on people knowing that they can hide behind the anonimity of the forum.
They're just sad.

At the end of the day,I don’t think the street walker in Brisbane is still around . As for Moorooka I dont think the pimps are pimpin the girls out

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 4FoW2

"up until the point they actually reveal themselves as police and attempt an actual arrest they are not utelising police powers"
"how could they be using police powers if they are undercover and pretending to not be police?"

So if a police officer is conducting an undercover operation he is not really a police officer with no police powers, until they reveal themselves.

Classic!

---

Dude, you've seriously lost the plot now. That made absolutely no sense what so ever. An undercover officer would reveal their identity as a police officer any time they attempted to utelise their police powers. And conversely as RLP stated they would not be taken seriously trying to use their police powers unless they revealed their identity.

Case in point, if a homeless guy issues you with a police order you would ignore him. But if the same homeless guy pulled out a badge and identified himself as a cop you would act accordingly.

Parse error: syntax error (T_STRING), user id 'NULL'

A bit of light reading .......

In Queensland a policeman can pose as a client, try to entrap sex workers, and have immunity against prosecution to conduct illegal activities because they are covered by the legislation in the PROSTITUTION ACT 1999 - SECT 75
(1) A police officer does not commit an offence against section 73 (1) if the soliciting is done under an authority given under the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000.
(2) However, a person other than a police officer commits an offence against section 73 (1) if the person publicly solicits the police officer.

BUT..............if you read the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act

"The police officer must, as soon as reasonably practicable,
inform the person the subject of the power of the following—
(a) if the police officer is not in uniform—
(i) that he or she is a police officer; and
(ii) his or her name, rank and station;
(b) if the police officer is in uniform—his or her name, rank
and station.
(3) If the police officer is not in uniform, the police officer must
also produce for inspection his or her identity card."

"up until the point they actually reveal themselves as police and attempt an actual arrest they are not utelising police powers" Wrong - The Act gives them the power to perform these operations without fear of prosecution. There is no point of reveal - they are always acting with police powers.
and "how could they be using police powers if they are undercover and pretending to not be police?" Wrong - see above
"Police are only require to identify themselves when they are attempting to use their police powers, not at the whim of some dimwit like yourself." Wrong- see legislation
"The forum pseudointellectual is at it again. This is an old myth and has long been confirmed as false." Wrong - see legislation.

It started off me just telling a story about old days - just reminiscing - and then the abuse started.
4FoW2

Oh sir, people were only pointing out that it wasn't necessary to ask if the person was a police officer as they don't need to answer that question truthfully. That was the myth! Oh you take things too personally sir. I do worry. Your story was riveting sir! Please don't take things the wrong way, I guess this is what happens in the rooms sir. The dark voice enters your mind and suddenly you believe everyones your enemy! Does this sound familiar sir?

Anyway lets enjoy our punting!

Any abuse you receive is well deserved, because you're a fucking moron!!! You're quoting rules and regulations for plain clothes police and trying to apply it to undercover operatives. If you put your hand up and accepted you were wrong none of this would be an issue. But instead you go from failed attempt to failed attempt, trying to explain why your stupidity isn't just that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RottenLittlePunt

Any abuse you receive is well deserved, because you're a fucking moron!!! You're quoting rules and regulations for plain clothes police and trying to apply it to undercover operatives. If you put your hand up and accepted you were wrong none of this would be an issue. But instead you go from failed attempt to failed attempt, trying to explain why your stupidity isn't just that.

---

How about you chill out. Both of you are as bad as each other. Neither of you are Solicitors and Bush Lawyers usually know SFA.

Sent from my BAH3-L09 using Tapatalk

4Fow2, you need to read the actual legislation rather than just try and cherry pick parts of it that you believe suit your view.

You quoted S.637 of the Police Powers and Responsibilities Act, which is found in Chapter 20 of that act. If you took the time to read it you would see the following;

"CHAPTER 20 - OTHER STANDARD SAFEGUARDS
PART 1 - PRELIMINARY
620 Chapter does not apply to covert operations"


No amount of you repeating yourself, or claiming others are just being abusive towards you, or your thinly veiled attempts at acting aloof to overcompensate for your own shortcomings will hide the fact that you are simply ignorant about this matter.

Oh sir, if the law is so nuanced, learned and elitist and we are all dumb mindless morons. Then how can anyone be charged for anything! You're the good elitist gatekeeper sir! The rest of us are beneath you. Oh poor us. I will use this defence on my next parking ticket and cite your passages!

Struth! Sounds like a shit show. What were they trying to achieve other than wasting the courts time.
Ridiculous that something as minor as that could affect your job opportunities in the future.