Monday, January 16, 2012

Schapelle Corby - Pinning Down The Australian Federal Police CCTV Dunces






































UPDATE 25 JAN 2012 -EXPENDABLE THE MOVIE RELEASED, EXPOSING GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION AND COMPLICITY IN THE JAILING OF AN INNOCENT WOMAN


A Formal Freedom of Information Request to The Australian Federal Police

CC - Philip Ruddock MP (Did you "Forget" this too Phil?)

Good morning,

Re: The operating manual of the Australian Federal Police, re the formal preservation of forensic CCTV evidence.

Further to my FOI reminder to you yesterday, I note there were a whole swathe of acknowledgements (re my various requests), in my post box by the afternoon (my mail doesn't normally arrive until after lunch), including the one I wrote to you about. Thank you.

As graphically explained in this blog post, there were a whole range of serious and glaring anomalies on the morning Schapelle flew that should have alerted any minimally competent police force re the need to expertly gather and preserve all the relevant evidence. However, I note that on the day in question, the Australian Federal Police failed to preserve a single frame of CCTV from any of the hundreds of cameras (within three Australian airports), relating to either her or her luggage.

However, the UK Home Office has produced a manual, explaining the correct procedures to follow. Maybe that's why criminal British baggage handlers (who use innocent passengers as unwitting drug mules), get locked away for nearly 20 years, while ours do not?

Therefore, I'm very much looking forward to your reply to this FOI request of mine, re the CCTV footage on the morning Schapelle flew - and I'd now like to add another request.

Can you please supply me with the official operating manual (and/or formal guidelines), that the Australian Federal Police are bound by when it comes to preserving forensic CCTV evidence.

I assume that information would be similar to the UK manual, and not "Secret," given that British Home Office have already chosen to publish their relevant information - unless (of course), the Australian public aren't allowed to judge whether or not their public servants have adhered to the relevant standards? Or even if there are any relevant standards?

I look forward to your response.

Regards, Kim