Pursuits and other events

Post by **celestial_insight** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 4:16 am

CHEV4EVR wrote:
Fastlane wrote:
CHEV4EVR wrote:
I dont see anything that indicates a 'fascination' with naming people in the above ??

Damned if you do, damned if you don't?
Before this sticky is completely side tracked read the "POLICE OFFICER CHARGED" firearms post on the Off Topic forum. Bottom line reads "I can't name him yet as he has not appeared in court"

Twice in two days...hmmm you may be right I don't see anything to indicate he may want to name people. If we want to continue lets move it to the off topic forum.

Which means - if anyone asks the name of the person involved, I can't disclose it. Do you not get it? IT IS ILLEGAL TO DISCLOSE THE NAME OF SOMEONE WHO HASN'T HAD THEIR FIRST COURT APPEARANCE. Pretty simple to understand for most. You see some people will try to get their name surpressed from the media, and their first court appearance is that chance. If you were in the media or a police officer you would know that. Actually, if you had simply read the disclaimer on the post, you could have worked that out. You really aren't that bright at all little boy. Maybe when you finish primary school you'll have enough intelligence to read. Get a life idiot and stop stirring up members of the forum. Try reading the post before firing off stupid comments.

radiohead · Post by **radiohead** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 7:35 am

Umm....

Corrupt me if I'm wrong..

But I believe Chev is actually an Officer of the Law mk...

Regardless of this, personally I wouldn't be so rude as to go speaking to anyone in such a rude way..

yes uh huh that is aimed at you celestial (cough) n00b (cough)

And of course, at the end of the day it just shows up how childish some people can be on here.

I quite like Chev's attitude and input on this forum

Nothing like a bit of intellectual stimulation lol..

Post by **celestial_insight** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 7:50 am

If he really is an officer of the law he would realise that I can't disclose the names of those charged when people PM me for the info (maybe he needs to study what he does for a living).

This is the reason I state it. I haven't disclosed any names hence I do not (as he suggests) have a fascination with wanting to name people. Quite the opposite in fact. I really don't understand where he is coming from or how many times I need to make it crystal clear. I HAVE NOT DISCLOSED ANY NAMES hence I HAVE NO FASCINATION FOR WANTING TO NAME PEOPLE. It is the people that PM me for the names that want to know. Everyone needs to re-read what this knob has written in the two posts about this "fascination".

Let's review :

CHEV SAYS : What is your fascination with wanting to name people. Sounds like you would rather be on a gossip forum than a scanner forum.

he then contradicts himself in a following post with my quote : "I can't name him yet as he has not appeared in court".

I still don't understand what this fool is on about. I think he has the fascination with naming people.

Oh and radiohead I accept your criticism and actually agree with you but people like CHEV who purposely try to start flame wars are idiots (check through some of his posts - this isn't the first time..) and need to be told to shut up and get a life.

Oh, and n00b ?? I have been listening to scanners and radio receivers since 1986 (ahhh yes, Police were VHF back then...) so this is hardly new....

If the forum would like me to no longer post information, I am more than happy to. No skin off my nose as they say..

radiohead · Post by **radiohead** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 8:56 am

Hey its ok.. No need for dramas, we're all friends here

Post by **gkoutlis** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 8:58 am

Now that Wembly base is all established, has the GL (Golf Lima) cars converted to GW - (Golf Whiskey) cars now?

I've seen the Leederville Police station, and it looks abandonded...

G

Post by **yorky** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 9:07 am

yeah a while ago the GL's went over to GW, not sure if all there callsigns have been changed as yet though.

Post by **gkoutlis** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 9:11 am

yorky wrote:yeah a while ago the GL's went over to GW, not sure if all there callsigns have been changed as yet though.

Thanks mate.

G

Kinetic · Post by **Kinetic** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 9:20 am

Tom · Post by **Tom** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 9:26 am

Yeah been like that for a few months now MrG....Wembley now has a massive area to cover..

GL101 became GW104
GL102 became GW105
GL103 became GW106.

c_i,

All CHEV did was ask you a question.....Your the one that's come back with all the abuse and started the flame war..

You really aren't that bright at all little boy. Maybe when you finish primary school you'll have enough intelligence to read. Get a life idiot and stop stirring up members of the forum.

Personally I didn't think their was any need for that.

IT IS ILLEGAL TO DISCLOSE THE NAME OF SOMEONE WHO HASN'T HAD THEIR FIRST COURT APPEARANCE.

Maybe you should open the 'West Australian'....offenders names are quoted on a frequent basis prior to their first court visit..I thought it was only where the alledged offender was <18years, the offence involved a sexual element where identifing the accused could led to their victim/s being exposed or where the judge has suppressed that info to the media.

As WARSUG legend Millsy has said many a time: I suggest you toughen the f*ck up celestial_insight...

Post by **gkoutlis** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 9:29 am

Yeah been like that for a few months now MrG....Wembley now has a massive area to cover..

GL101 became GW104
GL102 became GW105
GL103 became GW106.

Thanks Tom, I appreciate it. Does this mean there are more cars at wembley station or less? With the GL cars coming on board?

Tom · Post by **Tom** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 9:49 am

Wembley had 3 marked GD's cars now with Leedervilles the total is 6 all up.

That said I haven't seen GW103 in ages..

Post by **gkoutlis** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 9:51 am

Tom wrote:Wembley had 3 marked GD's cars now with Leedervilles the total is 6 all up.

That said I haven't seen GW103 in ages..

Roger that - Thanks mate.

G

Post by **celestial_insight** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 9:57 am

Tom wrote:

IT IS ILLEGAL TO DISCLOSE THE NAME OF SOMEONE WHO HASN'T HAD THEIR FIRST COURT APPEARANCE.

Maybe you should open the 'West Australian'....offenders names are quoted on a frequent basis prior to their first court visit..I thought it was only where the alledged offender was <18years, the offence involved a sexual element where identifing the accused could led to their victim/s being exposed or where the judge has suppressed that info to the media.

G'day Tom,

I'm just passing on information as is placed at the bottom of every media release that comes from the Western Australian Police Service :

Media organisations should be aware that publication (including electronic broadcast) of the name of a person charged with an offence, prior to that personâ€™s first appearance in court, defeats the right of that person to apply for their name to be suppressed from publication, pursuant to section 171 (4) (b) of the Criminal Procedure Act 2004. Although such orders are rarely granted, publication (or broadcast) of the name, prior to first appearance in court, may place a media organisation publishing the name in contempt of court.

Oh, and I read The West from cover to cover every day as part of my job, but thanks for suggesting it. I can't help it if The West breach any laws, as long as I don't, that is all I worry about.

Ludacris · Post by **Ludacris** » Fri Aug 03, 2007 10:19 am

Its funny how this has just gone on and on.....

I believe it all started from Chev4Evr asking a question of "What is your fasinatation with wanting to post names"

Then everyone has to have there little dig and then it gets bigger and bigger... Like I said in a previous post, seems to be way to many Keyboard warriors on here...

Maybe if that article was from the Media release it should have gone in the media Section and not clogged up 2 pages of Pursuit thread....