- Mar 5, 2008
- 55,236
- 35,859
Are the police involved?
James Roberts Drama
- Thread starter ivanhungryjak
- Start date
Are the police involved?
- Jan 25, 2013
- 25,705
- 30,048
That's my point. There is no official complaint, therefore the premises isn't "involved" in anything. Just a claim made on a gutter news site.
Jason Simmons
State of Origin Rep
- Apr 18, 2013
- 5,094
- 8,095
Not as far as I am aware. My comment was that a strategy that may eventually occur to the NRL, is to make a complaint of licenced premises serving intoxicated persons to Liquor Licencing, who have the same authority as police as far as seizing CCTV for investigations into Liquor Act breaches, is concerned.
Such would become available to the NRL then through RTI requests to OLGR...
- Sep 8, 2009
- 7,735
- 8,970
- Thread starter
- #436
Judging by this
the police may get involved which then changes everything.
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...s/news-story/a64ad72b08d0e3d0e5869897d8084737
the police may get involved which then changes everything.
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/...s/news-story/a64ad72b08d0e3d0e5869897d8084737
Jason Simmons
State of Origin Rep
- Apr 18, 2013
- 5,094
- 8,095
NRL have interviewed the complainant as of today reportedly...
- Jan 25, 2013
- 25,705
- 30,048
Right, but until something official happens, all of this is irrelevant:
They don't have to give the cops, or anyone, jack shit.
Therefore @Dash wash completely justified in refusing, should there have been no official complaint at the time.
Jason Simmons
State of Origin Rep
- Apr 18, 2013
- 5,094
- 8,095
Irrelevant yes, but interesting nonetheless. I expect we will see or hear of such soon.
You are not correct my friend, but as I've already posted what the offence is for failing to do so, I'm not going to bother. If you want to argue with the Act, feel free.
For OLGR or Qld police to inspect A. CCTV in a licenced premises, B. Security Provider logs, C. A Liquor licence and the licencee (and subordinates) compliance with said licence's conditions, neither OLGR nor police require a warrant or a complaint in order to do so, but we are going around in circles.
Feel free to go and read the actual Liquor Act if you are not happy with just the section of it, I have already posted that confirms what I am saying.
Jason Simmons
State of Origin Rep
- Apr 18, 2013
- 5,094
- 8,095
They can do it randomly, they can do it for 'intelligence' reasons, they can do it for an actual investigation (which is what it would be if NRL complained to OLGR per my comment) for pretty much any reason they wish, per the act. It says OLGR and Police can do 'x,y,z' there are no effective caveats under what curcumstances only are they allowed to do this and do that.
Checking the CCTV to see if Nightclub 'X' was serving intoxicated persons is certainly within both OLGR and the Police's authority under the Liquor Act and it's associated Regulations. No warrant, no complaint and no other authority other than what is under the Liquor Act is required.
OLGR's reason for being is ensuring licence conditions are met and enforced, do not even require a complaint to commence any investigation into such matters.
Does that make sense?
- Jan 25, 2013
- 25,705
- 30,048
Absolutely. Thanks for clarifying for the slow.
Jason Simmons
State of Origin Rep
- Apr 18, 2013
- 5,094
- 8,095
All good man, wasn't trying to start another long winded legal debate, merely a comment about my surprise about why the NRL doesn't follow the law up here to the letter and simply complain about intoxicated persons to OlGR and follow up from there...
Of course, the conspiracy theorist in me, would never suggest that they don't do this very thing so as to be able to publicly deny any knowledge of what 'really' happened and damage their brand...
It's not like the NRL with all of it's associated leagues club interests would have any association with the relevant liquor licencing authorities across the various States and be completely across what Liquor Licencing can and can't do in licenced premises...
- Jan 25, 2014
- 44,492
- 33,772
They can drag it out as long as they like, unfortunately.
This is smelling more and more by the day.
Doesn't want to make a complaint unless the NRL probe is derailled. You can't make a police complaint for a collateral purpose (getting footage for IU). It's called abuse of process.
Also if she makes a complaint and the real police (not IU) say there is nothing in it, or he gets acquitted in Court (like Bird) then it'll be law suits at 10 paces in the event that Roberts has been sacked.
As for the complaint gave a 'credible' account. Spare me. The IU thought the woman who accussed Boyd and Teo gave a 'credible' account too. They also thought the girl that accused Brett Stewart was credible.
This trial by leak and media has too stop.
Further IU has to have its wings clipped. No police complaint? Sorry, come back later.
Doesn't want to make a complaint unless the NRL probe is derailled. You can't make a police complaint for a collateral purpose (getting footage for IU). It's called abuse of process.
Also if she makes a complaint and the real police (not IU) say there is nothing in it, or he gets acquitted in Court (like Bird) then it'll be law suits at 10 paces in the event that Roberts has been sacked.
As for the complaint gave a 'credible' account. Spare me. The IU thought the woman who accussed Boyd and Teo gave a 'credible' account too. They also thought the girl that accused Brett Stewart was credible.
This trial by leak and media has too stop.
Further IU has to have its wings clipped. No police complaint? Sorry, come back later.
austin71
NRL Player
- Apr 21, 2013
- 1,325
- 368
I'm not sure using Brett Stewart as an example is the best idea lol
broncos4life
International Captain
- Oct 5, 2011
- 26,663
- 27,317
Agreed, that's really just pointing the finger...
- Mar 5, 2008
- 55,236
- 35,859
I still don't get why they would succeed
Sorry but I call bullshit. Why would they be under any obligation to release it under that to the NRL.
