posted on Jun, 5 2007 @ 10:41 AM
Just my opinion in response to the OPs question: 'How much do you trust the police': I feel Mr. and Mrs. Average are able to trust the police
regarding everyday situations such as home break-ins and 'Officer, I think I saw a suspicious character lurking at the bottom of the yard' -- also
traffic accidents, etc.
In other words, the average person with a spotless record (and I'm one) receives, as a rule, assistance, courtesy and professionalism.
There are other members of society however, who are treated differently by the police, I would imagine.
For example, when in my late teens, I worked and lived at the home of a family for a brief time. I didn't know what they did for a living. Both
the husband and wife spent most days at home with occasional disappearances spent riding, travelling, etc.
After a day off, I returned home one night to find my belongings had been tampered with. When I enquired, the husband apologised and went on to say
their home had been 'searched' earlier in the evening by the police. No further information was forthcoming, so I concluded the 'police search'
must have been in connection with possibly a break-in at the home prior to my arrival.
Some nights later, three men in suits arrived at the home. I briefly saw the husband speaking with the men, who appeared to be checking various items
of furniture within the home. Shortly afterwards, I saw the men removing several items of furniture: a large stereo system, etc. I thought no more
about it, assuming in my ignorance that the men must have been from an insurance company or somehow connected with the police visit.
I returned to my own home shortly afterwards and in the new year, returned to school. Later that year, on the return flight from an interstate visit,
I was shocked to discover on the front page of a newspaper, a blurred photo of women for whom I'd worked. The accompanying article stated she was
beseiged by journalists and reporters in connection with the shooting of her husband, the night before.
The article described the husband as a minor criminal, who'd been apprehended, shot and killed by police during the course of a robbery.
Immediately after the plane landed, I contacted the man's widow, to see I could be of assistance. She was then eight months pregnant with her third
child. Despite her ordeal, she was calm and resigned. She said her husband had been a small time criminal and went on to reveal that the 'men in
suits' whom I'd seen while I lived at her home, were in fact plain-clothes police. She said her husband had been required to regularly 'pay them
off' while he was alive. She named the 'leader' of the corrupt police and told me which police-station he worked out of.
I remembered the corrupt policeman in particular, because he'd been very polite and pleasant when I'd seen him at the house.
Apparently, the men I'd believed were 'inspecting the furniture' were not insurance men but other plain-clothes, corrupt police. The widow
informed me now that what they'd actually been doing was selecting the items they wanted for themselves. She explained that her deceased husband's
'business' hadn't been doing very well at that juncture. As consequence, he hadn't been able to make regular payments to the corrupt police. In
leiu of money, the police had agreed to take furniture.
The widow also told me that the police had done a deal with her deceased husband and his 'business partner'. The corrupt police had informed the
two men that they urgently needed to 'clear up' a number of outstanding offences and seeing as they had not been keeping up their 'payments', one
of the two would have to be charged, even though they were not guilty of those particular offences.
The husband's 'business partner' suffered from a condition known as 'hole in the heart'. He did a deal with the police. He said he would agree
to be the one charged, on the condition his 'business partner' undertook to support his wife and several children. This was agreed and the man was
charged. He was sent to a prison in the north of the State: a place long notorious for extreme brutality. For example, the prison guards alternately
tossed boiling and freezing water on prisoners whom they didn't like. Many prisoners died as result of various torture. It was an open secret,
apparently, amongst those with reason to know. Police corruption was entrenched. The media turned a blind eye. And if a prisoner died in jail
before his sentence was complete, his body remained the property of the State and was buried within the jail grounds. It's said that quick-lime was
thrown on bodies to hasten decomposition and thus obscure the brutality which had killed them.
The man with the heart-condition knew what confronted him but agreed to go because he believed he wouldn't live much longer in any case.
The widow's small-time criminal husband now had the responsibility of supporting his own and his jailed 'partner's' family. The widow told me it
wasn't long before he fell far behind in his forced pay-offs to the corrupt police.
On the night of his murder at the hands of the police (said his widow) they were visited in the early evening by a salesman for a funeral home. After
concluding his spiel, he suggested several times that the couple take advantage of the fact that were they to sign a contract and pay the initial
installment immediately, the husband's funeral expenses would be honoured by his company --- even if the husband were to die that night. Chuckle,
The widow told me she'd told the salesman that they couldn't afford it, sorry.
The salesman apparently countered with: ' Look, even though you're only young -- accidents happen. It's only a very small amount of money. And
look at the security it would give you.'
She replied again that she couldn't afford it. Then, as a joke, she said that if her husband died, she'd just have to hang him in the wardrobe.
The salesman departed.
Half an hour later, said the widow, she'd found her husband busily tearing up slips of paper and flushing them down the lavatory.
That evening, he went out 'to work'.
Just after dawn the police banged on her door to tell her that her husband was dead. He had been shot by the police during a robbery.
She now realised it had been the police who'd sent the funeral-plan salesman. And she realised that her husband had known this, which is why he'd
torn up the slips of paper (she assumed they'd contained other criminals contact and other details). She realised now that her husband had known --
before leaving 'for work' -- that he would not be returning home ever again.
Several months later, the widow was again in the news. The widow had taken on the corrupt police: had accused them of premeditated murder. She
When I contacted her, she said that the officer who'd fired the fatal shot had claimed he'd tried to apprehend the husband, who had made a run for
it. The officer claimed he'd shouted: 'Stop or I'll shoot', but the husband had kept running. The officer claimed that he had tripped, and this
had caused his gun to fire accidentally, thereby shooting the husband in the back and killing him. But no-one in the vicinity had heard the policeman
shout a warning.
Six months later, the dead man's brother's 'mysterious murder' was on the front page of the newspapers. It was claimed he'd been shot in the
back by 'person or persons unknown' whilst taking his dogs for a walk in the park in the early evening. It remains an unsolved case but the widow
had no doubt the police were responsible.
(continued next post)