Report: Aboriginal Deaths in Custody - No Racism or murder
by Kato RiveraThe Royal Commission of Inquiry into Aboriginal
Deaths in Custody presented Australia to the world as a barbaric and
racist nation; comparable with universally-reviled Apartheid South Africa; in which brutality and murder
ruthlessly contained its helpless indigenous minority.
What has yet to be revealed, is that the
reputations of Australian police and prison guards, and of Australia as a nation, have been impugned based on incidents that never took place
and conditions which never existed.
This is stated unambiguously in the official Report
of the Royal Commission into Aboriginal
Deaths in Custody, so why have we all been led to believe the opposite?
Earlier, a barrage of misrepresentations,
innuendo, unsubstantiated accusations, conspiracy theories, and outright
non-facts were presented as evidence to the Federal Government by a broad range
of tax-payer funded Aboriginal organisations and lobby groups. On that basis,
the Royal Commission of Inquiry was
launched.
Entirely enveloping the Royal Commission itself, was a rapidly intensifying storm of ruthless
opportunism, fed by Aboriginal activist hysteria and deliberate provision of
false evidence. Inexplicably, Contempt of
Court charges have yet to be laid. There was also:
Hopelessly
speculative tabloid journalism dressed up as documentary objectivity; Monumental
academic na飗et?that quickly deteriorated into a medieval inquisition; Criminally
cynical politicians of both major political parties; and Ambition,
judicial arrogance and posturing on a truly breathtaking scale.
What slipped by the international press was
that many of the deaths were copy-cat suicides; young Aborigines who were hanging
themselves in cells. Inexplicably, the Royal Commission blamed these suicides
on the authorities and, by association, the nation. The already documented
causes: post-drug abuse depression, alcoholic remorse, clinical depression, schizophrenia;
and an absolute absence of aspirational horizons and meaningful life goals, did
not rate a mention.
Nor was mentioned, the earlier demands by Aboriginal
Rightists that group cells be abandoned; that potentially self-harming
possessions be retained by prisoners. The latter was universally standard
practice, and group cells resulted from Aboriginal consensus of decades earlier.
Had both measures been retained, no suicides could have occurred.
Anticipating shrill screams of denial from Aboriginal Deaths in Custody careerists,
the following are verbatim quotes
from the official National Report of the
Royal Commission of Inquiry into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody:
he Report acknowledges in its
introduction that the Commission owed its origins to a background of
sustained Aboriginal Lobby claims to the effect that most if not all of
the Aboriginal deaths in custody over the specified period, were the
result of murder? (1.1.3)
The Royal Commission of Inquiry considered all
witness accounts, and examined all the circumstances of death of the 99
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders who died in custody over this period,
and this incorporated the optimum use of pathology and state of the art
forensic sciences.
he subjects of investigation
consisted of 88 males and 11 females, with an average age of 22 years? (1.1.1)
In its direct findings, the Royal Commission
left no room for misinterpretation or ambiguity: There was found to be
æ®no common thread of abuse,
neglect or racism?
The Report goes on to say, unambiguously?/span>
he conclusions reached in
this report will not accord with the expectations of those who anticipated
that the findings of foul play would be inevitable and frequent. That is
not the conclusion which the Commissioners reached. As reported in the
individual case reports which have been released, Commissioners did not
find that deaths were the product of deliberate violence or brutality by
the Police or Prison Officers? (1.2.2)
he work of the Commission has
established that Aboriginal people in custody do not die at a greater rate
than non-Aboriginal people in custody? (1.3.1)
æ® But it can certainly be said
that in many cases death was contributed to by system failures or absence
of due care?/span> (1.2.3)
This latter comment failed to qualify that the
same ystem failures?and bsence of due care?applied to all prisoners, regardless of race, and that for
non-Aborigines these continue to be the prevailing circumstances. Outrageously, included in ystem failures?is
the imprisonment of people who have failed to pay fines, a legal overkill which
mainstream society critics have complained about for decades, and which effects
all Australians equally who, for one reason or another, have failed to become
aware of or have forgotten to pay fines.
As a result of the Royal Commission, Aborigines
no longer go to jail for not paying fines. This is as it should be. What is
wrong is that non-Aborigines continue to be jailed for this rime? Recently,
a white disabled woman was convicted for failing to show a disabled sticker on
her car, the fine for which she refused to pay. She was sentenced to ten days
imprisonment. Under the terms of the Royal Commission implementations, if she
were Aboriginal, she would have been free. Is this not institutionalised racism?
In desperate need of even a tenuous
justification of the Royal Commission,
the definition of ystem failure?was extended to include virtually any
imprisonment of young Aborigines at all. The logic adopted was that, because
Aborigines dramatically outnumbered other Australians in prison, the
statistical solution was to not imprison Aboriginal offenders. This has
resulted in urbanised European-acculturated part Aborigines being placed on
farcically-supervised community service orders under non-existent ribal
elders? while young non-Aborigines go to jail for the same offences. In any
anthropological sense, there are no identifiable cultural differences between
the two parties.
Now devoid of consequences of crime, the
Commission mind-bogglingly simplistic implementations have also caused a 20%
increase in Aboriginal crime; as recently measured by alarmed Aboriginal
agencies.
It gets worse. Non-custodial sentences have delivered
hundreds of violent criminals to Aboriginal communities, who have then
proceeded to terrorise, bash, rob and rape; in careers of orgiastic violence; and
with absolute impunity from the police and courts. The Federal Government has
responded by overriding whatever remnants of clan authority survive; the
communities?last endemic hope.
In communities such as Wardeye, for law-abiding
citizens; especially women, life has become a terrifying nightmare from which
awakening is a long-abandoned hope.
One might well ask How is it possible to launch something as weighty as a Royal Commission
of Inquiry from a foundationless event, and get away with it?
Culpable politicians, bureaucrats and the
handful of journalists who actually research their work, have gambled on the
politically street-wise fact that nobody
actually reads reports. Every participating official is hoping that he or
she will be long gone when and if it all its the fan? As they know it one
day will.
Other factors have suppressed the truth. In the
climate of rigorously enforced political correctness of the 1980s; in which
heretic realists lost their careers, politically aware public servants were equally
cognizant of the ruthless vindictiveness of many Supreme Court Judges, one of
whom led the Commission from the outset; Justice James Muirhead.
This was a judge:
Who
had previously forced the NT Director of Welfare to provide financial
assistance for his clearly ineligible daughter; Who
had publicly described as worthwhile experiment?the illegal abduction
of Australia desert Centre Warlbiri children, as young as 7, and
subsequent transport to deserted Bremer Island to the north, as reatment?
for petrol-sniffing; notorious internationally as the boriginal Devils
Island?Who
thought three or four years custody to be sufficient punishment for bike
gang members who raped and beat a boy with chains; with the ultimate
intention of hurling him over a cliff; Who
presided over a trial in which a Navy Reservist, who attempted to murder
several innocent Aborigines by driving into them at speed with a motor
vehicle (thereby maiming several), was punished with the 憀oss of his
career?
Readers can decide for themselves if this indicates
sound judicial judgment, or inhumanely arrogant and insular self-interest.
In general terms, therefore, it can be fairly said
that the abuse of Royal Commission powers had its genesis in no grand
conspiracy. Rather, there were:
Lies
told with unmitigated malice. These included virtually all of the evidence
provided by Aboriginal activists and witnesses;
In
the power apex of bureaucracies, the usual cynical manipulations of
political ebbs and flows, to expand public service empires and personal
power bases; with no regard for the price paid by individuals,
institutions or by the nation;
An
arrogant judiciary that sees Royal Commissions as jewels on career crowns.
There would have been no Royal Commission if
the nominated judge had possessed the integrity and courage to turn the
position down. To suggest that Muirhead did not already know, or at the very
least suspect the truth, is an insult to the reader intelligence. Most
certainly, he had access to knowledgeable government officers who could have provided
balanced opinions; not one of whom would have supported an enquiry of any kind.
Nevertheless, it is impossible for any serious
observer to avoid speculation that, part way through the Inquiry, this judge
realised that the Royal Commission was horribly and fundamentally flawed.
Rather than announce this publicly, and so save the nation $280 million and a
damaged reputation, he slipped quietly away, as all about-to-be-disgraced
politicians do, claiming ill-health.
Police
and prison officers
It is a matter of public record that Aboriginal
deaths do occur in police cells and
in prisons, although not in the significant numbers claimed by part Aboriginal
activists and their irresponsible groupies.
Firstly, it was alleged that police beat
Aborigines so severely while arresting them that they later died of their
injuries. Other claims were that police beat prisoners in their holding cells.
There can be absolutely no doubt that both abuses occurred sporadically, as they do with non-Aborigines, but
such accusations ignore the evidence of the violence of the brawls that
attracted police attention in the first place; routinely involving such lethal
weapons as steel fence posts (star pickets). Terminal injuries are commonplace;
a fact entirely ignored by the media.
Even when exasperated police do respond to wild
and uncontained violence with violence of their own, in all commonsense it must
be recognised that officers who are brutal, tend to be brutal with everybody. Moreover,
the wider community wants the police to deal with extremely violent criminals
and, it must be said, many of these criminals are Aboriginal, or to be more
accurate and fair to traditional people, are invariably part Aboriginal. Sadly, because of the Royal Commission,
traditional people violence is increasing.
Aboriginal criminals now cry police brutality and victimisation at every opportunity, and
journalists pump sensationalism just as cynically. Denied support by their
senior officers who are inordinately influenced by the media/politician
relationship, police close ranks; the
good with the bad. Unquestioning loyalty to fellow officers becomes the one
sure means of survival. Under the circumstances, who can blame them?
The current toadyism of senior officers, and affirmative action appointment of police
hierarchy is not only the cause of this problem, it ensures that there can be
no resolution.
Finally, regarding the matter of police and
prison officers being unjustly accused of racism, brutality and murder, these
accusations would have affected officers?reputations in the community, the
social acceptance of their families, the attitudes of their children to their
parents, and the personal confidence and dignity of each individual officer.
At the very least,
there should have been a public apology to these people, one that was heard in every home
in Australia, and through overseas media outlets. These
were people who had been libeled, not accidentally through pursuit of the
public interest, but deliberately and maliciously, and for personal gain. One
of the intentions of this article is to ensure that the reputations of these
officers and their respective services are cleared.
Until this basic justice has been implemented,
and the truth behind the Royal Commission has resonated around the world, there
will be a future litany of phony Mulruntji Doomadgee-style complaints, even
further undermining Australian justice, simultaneously relieving Aborigines of
the need to accept responsibility for their own behavior and actions.
The damage to Australia social infrastructure has been so
severe that it demands unique measures. Nothing less than a formal and entirely
independent non-judicial investigation into the Royal Commission and its
aftermath, can possibly restore Australia once proud sense of justice.
This must be followed by an investigation into
the vast and destructive gap between the perceptions of justice of the
Australian people, and the utterly rejected judicial position. Rephrased
historically, common law must override
parliamentary abuses and judicial activism.
–The full paper is
available from Kato Rivera on request; contact:
Tags: activist, ambition, appointment, attitude, australians, cate, decades, europe, journalist, outset, spira, ups