Cowardly Cop's Violent Assault Charges Dismissed (General)

by dulan drift ⌂, Saturday, February 25, 2023, 09:49 (427 days ago) @ dulan drift

If anyone still wanted proof that Victoria has become a police-state under Dan Andrews, then here it is.

Remember the case of the Vic police officer (Beau Barret) who approached a peaceful protester (Daniel Peterson-English) from behind as he chatted to other officers, then slammed his head into the concrete (causing brain damage)?

All charges have now been dismissed by a judge (Rob Stary). Didn't even get to trial before a jury!

9 News: A police officer who was filmed slamming a man to the ground at a Melbourne train station has had the criminal charges against him dropped.

Magistrate Stary: Mr Peterson-English's behaviour can only be described as threatening and abusive in which he taunted police continuously.

Threatening & abusive?! Ok, so what did he say? No mention - that's all hush-hush. If you look at the footage of him talking to police officers, there's nothing threatening or abusive in his body language - everything looks calm. Even if he was abusive (of which there's no evidence), that doesn't justify sneaking up behind him & slamming his head into the the concrete. He definitely wasn't exhibiting any signs of physically abusing anyone - totally non-violent protester. If police really felt compelled to arrest him, then do it in a humane way.

Magistrate Stary: It may be that the arrest was executed in a way that is not in strict accordance with the manual. But whether it could be said to be unlawful and whether it could be said to be done without any regard to the probable consequences and criminal intent, in my view a jury properly instructed could not convict Mr Barrett of those offences.

May be not in strict accordance with the manual? It's straight out sickening thuggery - caught on camera for all to see. There's no maybe about it. Barret lost control & showed zero regard to the consequences as he executed a cowardly attack on a un-armed, passive civilian.

The last part is the most revealing - a jury properly instructed could not convict Barret - this is Stary's main concern.

Key point is: don't let this case get anywhere-the-fuck-near a jury. Once normal people take a look at that video, there's no way that Barret gets off. So it's imperative to kill this case before that happens.

So chilling. This sends a green-light to the police to commit whatever kind of illegal brutality they like against Freedom protesters. To keep us (the lying elites) safe.

It's worth noting that Australia's public funded broadcaster, ABC, has censored any mention of this case despite its newsworthiness. Nothing when it happened - nothing re the above development. Censorship is a form of lying - why do i have to pay for that?


video: https://twitter.com/i/status/1440715488821055489


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread