* will intimidate police,

* will resist arrest,

* will assault police, or

* will question police powers.

It can also contain personal information such as:

* aliases,

* associates, and

* health issues such as HIV status.

Other entries include such information as:

* may carry a knife,

* may carry a firearm,

* drugs courier, and

* IV drug user.

Intelligence history follows an individual around for a very long time. Its primary purpose seems to be a system of negative reporting that provides police in the field with information that may be relevant at the time. Entries are usually very short and to the point. At first glance, it appears to be an excellent method to keep police on the front line informed and safe.

Sadly, the system of negative reporting also has an ugly side. Since any police officer can add an entry, those who have a strong dislike for certain individuals can make adverse entries they know will cause that individual some trouble in the future. For example, if a police officer does an intelligence check on an individual and hears that the individual hates police, will challenge police, will question police powers, will resist arrest, they are a drugs courier and they may carry a firearm, there is a very strong possibility that the individual will be treated aggressively and searched. At the very least, they will be shown zero tolerance even if none of the entries are true.

Another major problem with the system of negative reporting is that it is accessible by police officers over their radio networks. A police officer can stop someone and provide their name, date of birth and address and the response they receive may include traffic, criminal and intelligence history entries. Anyone listening to a radio scanner can find out a lot of sensitive information about an individual if a check is done over the radio.

Police have tried using data terminals which are found in many police vehicles but these seem to have a lot of problems with reception. An alternative solution is required to avoid unverified, vindictive or very personal information being released so freely about any individual in the future.

Big Rob’s Rant  is interactive while being broadcast. You can join me at facebook.com/BigRobsOz spelt B-I-G-R-O-B-S-O-Z or you can follow the Big Rob’s Rant links on the Big Rob’s website at bigrobs.com.au.

This is Big Rob on 92.9 River FM.

Rant 2

I briefly mentioned filming and photographing police last week when speaking about recording conversations. Filming and photographing police is often the subject of considerable aggression from police.

This issue received some media attention in Byron Bay recently when police were heard warning people not to film them and threatening them with legal action for interfering with their work. As are similar threats about recording conversations, this is very common from police and may also be very illegal.

Police may try to use move along directions or other powers to prevent a member of the public filming them. Unless used correctly, the use of such powers is unlawful.

Questions are often asked as to why police have such an issue with being filmed or photographed. It may be that they are doing something they shouldn’t be and do not want to be caught, they may do something they shouldn’t and don’t want to be caught or they may honestly believe that members of the public can’t record them.

In relation to the last point, the NSW Police Force has a media unit which has been quoted as saying:

“Members of the public have the right to take photographs of or film police officers, any incidents involving police officers, which are observable from a public space, or from a privately owned place with the consent of the owner or occupier.”

With such a clear statement from the NSW Police Force about members of the public having the right to photograph or film police, it makes you wonder what is going on with the NSW Police Force. Are they doing things they should not be doing or do they want to do things they should not be doing?

I often take photographs of police and sometimes film them. I even have footage of a police officer threatening me with arrest for filming him. He seemed to have a major issue with the voice recording component of the filming. He was clearly not aware that filming was a right and it can include sound when in a public space and not recording a private conversation. The media film with sound every day.

There is also a great community interest in photos and footage of police or incidents occurring. The media often pays very good money for footage obtained even if it is on an iPhone or of poor quality. Images speak volumes and can be very powerful. This was recently seen when police were filmed lying about an incident on a bus where a man was tasered. The footage that appeared after the incident showed the man was very polite and was set upon by police for reasons unknown.

It is understandable why people are reluctant to film or photograph police. It can be pretty frightening being confronted by various well armed individuals with the ability to arrest and charge you at their leisure. Until such time as the courts become less likely to take the word of police in situations where there are no other witnesses or recorded images, such a fear will remain in members of the public.

If anyone decides they would like to film or photograph police but would like to share the material anonymously, they can do so by submitting the material to me by email at info@bigrobs.com.au. Contact details are available through the Big Rob’s website at bigrobs.com.au.

I often receive images from members of the public who allow me to use the material if I keep their name out of it. I am more than happy to continue doing this as I have no problem publishing material involving police - good or bad.

You are listening to Big Rob’s Rant on 92.9 River FM.

Come and join me at facebook.com/BigRobsOz spelt B-I-G-R-O-B-S-O-Z or follow the Big Rob’s Rant links on the Big Rob’s website at bigrobs.com.au if you would like to make a comment.

Rant 3

The ‘linking program’ is a term loosely used to describe the NSW Office of Liquor, Gaming and Racing’s scheme of alcohol restrictions in violent venues. Its purpose since October 2008 is to regulate licensed premises with high levels of assault and other violent incidents.

The scheme uses violent incident data compiled twice yearly by the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research. Incidents for inclusion as relevant incidents attributed to licensed premises include assault officer, grievous bodily harm, actual bodily harm, assault, drink spiking, shoot with intent to murder, murder, riot / affray, manslaughter, kidnapping, aggravated indecent assault, assault with intent to have sexual intercourse, sexual assault, indecent assault and violent disorder.

Licensed premises with high levels of these incidents are categorised as level 1, 2 or 3 venues depending on the number of incidents during the particular reporting period. Additional special licence conditions will apply to level 1 and 2 venues.

Incident numbers, levels and additional licence conditions include:

* 8 to 11 incidents - Level 3

No additional special licence conditions

* 12 to 18 incidents - Level 2

Must stop serving alcohol 30 minutes before closing

No glass containers after midnight

Ten minute alcohol sales time out every hour after midnight or active distribution of water and / or food

* 19 or more incidents - Level 1

All conditions required under Level 2

Mandatory 2am lockout of patrons (excluding members of registered clubs)

No shots and drink limit restrictions after midnight

One or more additional security measure

All level 1 and 2 venues must maintain a standard trading period incident register and all levels are provided with education and support.

What does all this mean?

The linking program is seemingly trying to put the pressure on licensed venues to reduce levels of alcohol consumption or levels of intoxication through a method of recording incidents that occur either at a venue or away from a venue if it involves someone who had been drinking at a particular venue.

I have not personally noticed any benefit from the program. If the program was successful, I would go so far as to say that the new ‘three strikes’ disciplinary scheme would not be required. This new scheme really has licensed venues shaking in their boots since it also includes the ability to shut venues down.

An often ignored side effect of the linking program, and possibly of the new scheme in time, is the incentive not to report incidents. Licensed premises have been confronted with punishment if they report any violent incidents. It is in their interest to deal with matters themselves wherever possible or to make them disappear. It seems staff tends to take greater risks trying to handle violent incidents when they used to simply call police in the past. The alternative is to continue calling police when something goes wrong and face being categorised in the higher levels, shamed publicly and then having to deal with the restrictions that follow.

The crime statistics seem to be showing a reduction in violent incidents at licensed premises since the commencement of the linking program but it is my belief that the only statistic that has reduced in real terms since the program commenced is the reporting rate of violent incidents. This will become more evident as time goes on and fewer resources are allocated to areas showing reductions in crime statistics and those remaining resources become stretched to breaking point.

This is Big Rob bringing you Big Rob’s Rant on 92.9 River FM.

I am still posting on the Big Rob’s Facebook page at facebook.com/BigRobsOz spelt B-I-G-R-O-B-S-O-Z or you can follow the Big Rob’s Rant links on the Big Rob’s website at bigrobs.com.au if you want to post your views.

Rant 4

Inequitable treatment is an issue which really fires me up. There is rarely a valid justification for allowing one person to do something, obtain a benefit or participate that another is prevented from doing, obtaining or participating themselves.

Examples of what I am referring to when I speak of inequitable treatment include:

• council staff ignoring a person because they don’t like them;
• police giving a pretty girl a lift home and telling a guy to walk;
• security staff hassling one person for doing something while ignoring another; and
• an organisation making one individual an outcast because they do not share the same views as others who are made to feel very welcome.

Racism and discrimination are very serious issues in any society. Legislation exists to try and prevent it from occurring. There is no similar legislation in existence that prevents inequitable treatment unless it can be categorised into racism or discrimination. Even though they are illegal, they still occur so regularly anyway.

Inequitable treatment is so often ignored because it usually sees the individual targeted being labelled in various negative ways. ‘Trouble maker’ is a very common label. ‘Violent’, ‘aggressive’, ‘difficult’, ‘rude’, ‘obnoxious’ and even ‘controversial’ are amongst many of the labels I have heard thrown around in recent times. Their inequitable treatment is justified for this reason.

Similarly, the same individual labelled above could also be just as easily labelled positively in many ways such as ‘a pioneer’, ‘passionate’, ‘forceful’, ‘motivated’, ‘ahead of their time’ or even ‘persistent’. I was always raised believing that someone who never gives up on a fair and just cause is a good person. They should be heard and shown respect regardless of whose feelings may be hurt by their words and actions.

A lot of people really need to stop, before acting, and ask if what they are doing is the right thing. They should try and answer whether their friends and family would be proud of them if they were watching or if the story is one they would be proud to share.

Treating everyone fairly and equitably is not just a nice thing to do - it is the right thing to do.

I am still posting on the Big Rob’s Facebook page at facebook.com/BigRobsOz spelt B-I-G-R-O-B-S-O-Z. You can also find me by visiting the Big Rob’s website at bigrobs.com.au and following the Big Rob’s Rant links. Join me to share your views.