By Nick Dole

Updated 21 Nov 2018, 11:56am

PHOTO: The officer initially told superiors his friend wanted to try the uniform and join the force. (AAP: Dean Lewins)

A Sydney police officer was fired after he loaned his uniform and handcuffs to a friend, believing they would be used in a fetish fantasy.

Key points:

• Police made the unexpected discovery during a 2015 raid on a home
• It was subsequently revealed an officer had lent the handcuffs and uniform to a friend
• The decision to sack the officer was upheld at the Industrial Relations Commission

The Industrial Relations Commission was told the handcuffs and uniform were discovered in a police raid on the home of the friend, who was suspected of using a government laboratory to manufacture illicit drugs.

The officer "M" — who was a police prosecutor — later admitted providing advice to the suspect about the evidence authorities had gathered.

The officer's superiors believed his actions put him in "outright conflict" with his police duties.

He was sacked by Police Commissioner Mick Fuller in 2017 — a decision that was upheld by the Commission in September.

The saga began in 2013, when drug squad officers raided an Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) facility in Sydney.

Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation

Organisation

The Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation is a statutory body of the Australian government, formed in 1987 to replace the Australian Atomic Energy Commission. Its head office and main facilities are in southern outskirts of Sydney at Lucas Heights, in the Sutherland Shire.

They were acting on suspicions an ANSTO employee, known as "A" and who was friends with the police prosecutor, had been using the lab to produce methamphetamine, or "ice".

PHOTO: The ANSTO facility in Sydney was the subject of a police probe. (ABC News: Nick Dole)

Police took swabs inside the lab.

According to an officer involved the swabs returned positive results for "some meth" and cocaine, the NSW Civil Administrative Tribunal was told in 2016.

Police spoke with "A" and his lawyer and told them traces of ice had been found on his lab equipment.

However, a formal analysis later showed no drugs were present.

The device police used for the initial test can produce false positive results.

No charges were laid against "A" and the ABC does not allege wrongdoing by him or any other ANSTO employee.

"A" was not involved in the operation of the nuclear reactor and no longer works at ANSTO.

Search uncovered handcuffs and uniform

In 2015, police searched the home of "A" and made an unexpected discovery.

They found a pair of police-issued handcuffs, which are considered a prohibited weapon

They also found a police-issued belt, leather jacket, hat, shirt, pants and leather gloves.

They belonged to "A's" friend, police prosecutor "M".

"M" initially informed superiors his friend wanted to join the police and wished to try on the uniform, the Industrial Relations Commission was told.

However, during cross-examination, "M" offered another explanation.

Question: "The real reason you stored your uniform and appointments at A's house was he had a uniform fetish?"

Answer: "The main reason yes."

Question: "... You knew that he would live out that fetish and wear the uniform didn't you?"

Answer: "Possibly, yes."

'That is an outright conflict'

The ANSTO employee "A" claimed to be the victim of a vexatious report to police and sought information, via freedom of information laws, about the evidence they had gathered against him.

Some of the information he gathered was later reviewed by his police prosecutor friend "M".

Doing that was at odds with "M's" duties as a police prosecutor, a supervisor said.

In evidence to the Commission, "M's" supervisor, recalled what he had told her.

"[He said] we have been friends for eight years," the supervisor said.

"I had looked over some documents with him regarding an allegation about three years ago and advised him if there was sufficient evidence to charge."

The supervisor said she replied: "M, that is an outright conflict."

PHOTO: NSW Police Commissioner Mick Fuller sacked the officer who lent his uniform. (AAP: Dan Himbrechts)

"M" maintained that had he understood the extent of the investigation, he would have reported his conflict of interest to his superiors immediately.

At various times during the investigation, "M" denied giving advice to his friend about police evidence.

However, under cross examination, "M" conceded he had done soIn his judgement refusing "M's" bid for reinstatement, Chief Commissioner Peter Kite SC said the police prosecutor did not fully understand his obligation to "integrity above all".

"The applicant did not put his obligations as a police officer ahead of his desire to assist a friend, he did the reverse," he said.

All charges dropped, as the couple launch the biggest police compensation claim in Victoria’s history.

A nightmare no one deserves. Inflation nightclub shooting victims Dale Ewins and Zita Sukys.Source:Supplied

All charges dropped, as the couple launch the biggest police compensation claim in Victoria’s history.

It had been an erotic fancy dress theme at the Saints and Sinner’s club night taking place at Melbourne’s Inflation nightclub. Couples danced to house music on the dancefloor, flirted by the bar, while others got more amorous in the darkened, more secluded areas of the club.

It was in the early hours of the morning on June 8th 2017, when barman Dale Ewins, 36, who’d dressed up as The Joker from Batman and his partner, mother of two, Zita Sukys, 38, from Surf Beach, wearing a sexy Harley Quinn from the Suicide Squad costume, were getting intimate on a couch on the first floor of the club.

Dale Ewins, 35, and Zita Sukys, 37, were at an adult costume party when the shooting occurred.Source:Channel 7

Then all hell broke loose when police, acting on a tip-off that a man was carrying a gun, repeatedly shot and then tasered Ewans, as he performed oral sex. Earlier, Ewins had been carrying a fake gun as part of his Joker outfit.

Ewins received bullet wounds to his torso and consequently required 11 surgeries to reconstruct his shoulder and remove half of his bowel. While Sukys was shot in the leg. Once in the thigh and once in the knee.

Now after a year-long investigation, Victorian Police have announced that they will not be charging Ewins with any crime.

Victorian law firm Arnold Thomas and Becker have launched a civil action on behalf of the pair, claiming it is the 'most significant police shooting compensation claims in the history of the state of Victoria'.

Contradicting claims made by police that Ewins was holding a mock gun when they opened fire, several witnesses say Ewin's hands were empty.

Inflation nightclub shooting victims Dale Ewins and Zita Sukys.Source:Supplied

The owner of Inflation, Martha Tsamis said the couple were in a 'compromising position' at the time and the 'male victim was not holding anything in his hand'.

'Security had no concerns prior to the incident, and advised police on attendance that they were more than happy to deal with any issues,' the owner wrote on Facebook.

'But police rejected this advice, stormed in, fired three shots and a taser.'

Sukys said in a previous interview with The Age, that it's not only the injuries and psychological effects that have devastated her life.

Zita Sukys. Source Supplied.

'The impact this horrendous public event has had on my life has been nothing short of a nightmare,' she said.

 -------------------------------------------------------------------

Trial date set for Vic sex party shooting

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/trial-date-set-for-vic-sex-party-shooting

Dale Ewins and Zita Sukys, who were shot by police during a Melbourne erotic party, may face a four-week trial in their lawsuit against the State of Victoria.

UPDATED 07/02/2019

 

A couple shot by police during an erotic party at a Melbourne nightclub may face a four-week trial in their lawsuit against the state of Victoria.

Dale Ewins, 36, and his partner Zita Sukys, 38, were shot by Critical Incident Response Team officers during a fancy-dress Saints and Sinners ball at Inflation nightclub in July 2017.

Mr Ewins, who dressed as the Joker, claims he had been performing a sex act on Ms Zukys on a couch before he was shot twice in the back and then tasered.

The pair's lawyers claim police were negligent and used excessive force when they stormed the club and opened fire with hollow-point bullets, seriously injuring Mr Ewins.

But Victoria Police says Mr Ewins had reached under a cushion and pulled out what looked like a gun, which turned out to be a fake weapon.

The couple are suing authorities for damages over their injuries and have brought defamation action against the state.

A trial date was scheduled for July, when their case came before the Supreme Court on Thursday for a brief hearing.

"For 20 to 25 days," Associate Justice Melissa Lee Daly said, as she pencilled in the dates.

The judge noted mediation was set to occur between the parties in coming weeks, which could impact trial proceedings.

Mr Ewins and Ms Zukys were not present in court, with their case adjourned to July 29.

[ Yes, it is three years old.]

Dash Cam Owners Australia

May 1, 2016 · 

"Thursday 28/4/16 .The gold station wagon going Northbound was overtaking several trucks ,and forced the police wagon off the Newel Hwy,south of Tomingely,and the police driver ,did not look in mirrors ,no indication,no bells and whistles"

Thanks to Ian

Filmed with a Blackvue DR600 / DR650
http://dashcamownersaus.com.au/…/blackvue-dr600gw-hd-gps-w…/

https://www.facebook.com/DashCamOwnersAustralia/videos/1088417214551251/  0:32

[ I bet he 'far-coughed' before anyone got his details.]

Up here in Q'ld., 'Plod' tells us he is exempt from the "Traffic Act".

What 'Plod' forgets is 'Dangerous Driving' comes under the

Criminal Code to which he is not exempt.

CRIMINAL CODE 1899 - 

Dangerous operation of a vehicle

328A DANGEROUS OPERATION OF A VEHICLE

(1) A person who operates, or in any way interferes with the operation of, a vehicle dangerously in any place commits a misdemeanour.

Penalty—

Maximum penalty—200 penalty units or 3 years imprisonment.

(2) If the offender—

(a) at the time of committing the offence is adversely affected by an intoxicating substance; or

(b) at the time of committing the offence is excessively speeding or taking part in an unlawful race or unlawful speed trial; or

(c) has been previously convicted either upon indictment or summarily of an offence against this section;

the person commits a crime.

Penalty—

Maximum penalty—400 penalty units or 5 years imprisonment.

(3) If the offender has been—

(a) previously convicted either upon indictment or summarily of an offence against this section committed while the offender was adversely affected by an intoxicating substance; or

(b) twice previously convicted either upon indictment or summarily (or once upon indictment and once summarily) of the same prescribed offence or different prescribed offences;

the court or justices shall, upon conviction, impose as the whole or part of the punishment, imprisonment.

(4) A person who operates, or in any way interferes with the operation of, a vehicle dangerously in any place and causes the death of or grievous bodily harm to another person commits a crime and is liable on conviction on indictment—

(a) to imprisonment for 10 years, if neither paragraph (b) nor (c) applies; or

(b) to imprisonment for 14 years if, at the time of committing the offence, the offender is—

(i) adversely affected by an intoxicating substance; or

(ii) excessively speeding; or

(iii) taking part in an unlawful race or unlawful speed trial; or

(c) to imprisonment for 14 years, if the offender knows, or ought reasonably know, the other person has been killed or injured, and the offender leaves the scene of the incident, other than to obtain medical or other help for the other person, before a police officer arrives.

(5) The offender may be arrested without warrant.

(6) In this section— 


"excessively speeding" means driving or operating a vehicle at a speed more than 40km/h over the speed limit applying to the driver under the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995 . 


"operates, or in any way interferes with the operation of, a vehicle dangerously" means operate, or in any way interfere with the operation of, a vehicle at a speed or in a way that is dangerous to the public, having regard to all the circumstances, including—

(a) the nature, condition and use of the place; and

(b) the nature and condition of the vehicle; and

(c) the number of persons, vehicles or other objects that are, or might reasonably be expected to be, in the place; and

(d) the concentration of alcohol in the operator’s blood or breath; and

(e) the presence of any other substance in the operator’s body.

"place" does not include a place being lawfully used to race or test vehicles under a licence or another authority under an Act and from which other traffic is excluded at the time. 


"prescribed offence" means—

(a) an offence against this section; or

(b) an offence charged on indictment involving the driving or operation of a vehicle at a speed causing or likely to cause injury to anyone; or

(c) an offence against the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995 , section 79 (1) , (1F) , (2) , (2AA) , (2A) , (2B) , (2D) or (2J) .

"the public" includes passengers in a vehicle whether in a public or private place. 


"unlawful race" means a race involving a vehicle in contravention of the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995 , section 85 . 


"unlawful speed trial" mean a trial of the speed of a vehicle in contravention of the Transport Operations (Road Use Management) Act 1995 , section 85 .