Police Corruption. What Is It Really in Aid Of?


by Mary W Maxwell, LLB

Corruption seems to be killing our institutions. It is now part of Western culture and most people are resigned to it.  This series will look at corruption in police, the judiciary, the legislature, and corruption in journalism.

The derivation of the word “corruption” provided by the Online Etymology Dictionary is:

“corrupted, debased in character,” from Old French corropt “unhealthy, corrupt; uncouth” (of language) and directly from Latin corruptus, past participle of corrumpere “to destroy; spoil,” figuratively “corrupt, seduce, bribe….”

All three meanings are from 14th century:

“decomposing, putrid, spoiled”

“changed for the worse, debased by admixture or alteration” (of language, etc.)

“guilty of dishonesty involving bribery.”

We can deduce that if something is corruptible, there was originally something good or pure. When looking at police corruption, we should think of the ideal of, or perhaps even the actuality of, a police force that enforced law properly.

Changing It for the Worse

The corrupting of it – “changing it for the worse” — would quite naturally take the form of a cop starting to be influenced by a factor other than duty, such as money. Or maybe he is blackmailed or simply bullied into using his office to serve the wrong cause. He is now corrupted.

Corruption often becomes the norm. My friend in Indonesia told me, years ago, that any time she had to get an official signature on a form (say, a postal change of address) the clerk would expect a “tip.” No doubt the clerk’s job description forbade any such personal payment.

A recent Gumshoe’s article by Dee McLachlan has the title: “A Female Police Officer Was the Catalyst in the State’s Abduction of a Child.” It is about a real case, with the name of the female cop disguised as “Officer Demeter” and her superior as “Detective Lemon.”

The young girl in this story was video-interviewed by Demeter in November 2017. Her disclosures could have led to “something,” but led to nothing.  I mean nothing in the way of halting the crime of child sexual abuse, generally. In fact her disclosures remain a secret under a provision of the law that ostensibly protects personal privacy but ridiculously protects corruption and outright crime.

Subsequently, in May 2018, the child was taken from home – on very false pretenses. The state asked for custody and the protective mum yelled “Oh no you don’t.”  This led to what now turns out to be a well-known grueling process of protective parents trying to get their child back, when the spouse is a sexual abuser.

Dee McLachlan says that the grabbing of this child, by the state of South Australia, amounts to a criminal abduction. She relies on the Criminal Law Consolidation Act 1935 SA,  section 80:

(1) “Any person who (a) unlawfully, either by force or fraud … (c) deprives any parent … having the lawful care of the child … shall be guilty of an offence and liable to be imprisoned for a term not exceeding seven years.” [Emphasis added]

To prove fraud, she points to “false representation of a matter of fact … or by concealment of what should have been disclosed … and is intended to deceive…,” and “used to gain a legal advantage or accomplish a specific crime.” Officer Demeter might meet those criteria by dint of having told the mother immediately after the video’d interview that “there’s nothing to go by” – that is, the kid did not furnish usable material.

McLachlan also hopes Officer Demeter will be prosecuted for:

 s241— Impeding investigation of offenses and assisting offenders;

 s243—Fabricating, altering or concealing evidence;

s14—Criminal neglect (where a child suffers harm as a result of an act),

To make a prosecution happen, one would have to write to the DPP. In SA, Adam Kimber, SC, was the DPP until 2019; he is now a judge. The name of the current DPP is not listed on the dpp.sa.gov.au website. Perhaps the job is vacant at the moment.

Other methods of starting some legal action would be to contact the Attorney General, the Commissioner of Police, the Ombudsman, the ICAC, etc, all of which were tried in the last year and came up empty. Oh, and a couple of ministers in Parliament.

Corruption Is Taken for Granted!

Nowadays people take corruption for granted and do not even contemplate a world where the bad guys are brought to book.

A famous example of corruption within the (wholly corrupt?) US Department of Justice is Jeffrey Epstein’s trafficking of girls. Photos of him with Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, and Prince Andrew date back to the 1990s. With pals like that you wouldn’t expect Epstein’s crimes to get investigated.

Somehow, he did get arrested in 2008 but made a plea bargain and got off with a painless punishment.

Here is another example of how corruption is taken for granted. Matthew Condon reported this in his book All Fall Down concerning Queensland police corruption and the 1980s Fitzgerald Inquiry. It is about a snuff film. (p 56):

“Officer Jim Slade claims to have seen a film of a child being abused and murdered. He was interviewed by investigators but was not questioned before Kimmins during the hearings. Detectives were warned that that any search warrants issued on judicial officers had to be vetted first by senior police. The inquiry “found no evidence that police had covered up pedophilia.”

And recall the cri de couer of Peter Lewis when he was Speaker of the House in South Australia:

“I [was]bringing some of the people who had made the allegations [about child trafficking] to the point where they might pluck up enough courage and confidence and swear the truth of those allegations, enabling them to be more carefully investigated.

“But they were being ‘bumped off’ – that is, murdered and viciously assaulted – quicker than I could get them to write down their allegations. The most outrageous thing of all [is] the related and organised activities of those pedophiles in high public office – that is, the judiciary, the senior ranks of human services portfolios, some police and MPs, across the nation….” 

There are many ways to shut up a good cop who reveals internal matters. Again, from Condon’s All Fall Down:

In April, the former Police Chief of the Cairns region, Kevin Dorries, was dying of cancer. “He possessed some information so powerful it could almost instantly bring down the government.” Dorries wanted to turn it in, in exchange for getting his $275 superannuation payment released. According to a Dorries family member, Queensland’s Deputy Premier Bill Gunn

“went and spoke to Dorries in a motel room. He, Dorries, wanted to give up [intelligence he had] on a paedophile ring. Bill promised he would go after this. But Dorries died of cancer before Bill got around to this.”

I would say that the public’s acceptance of corruption is part of the problem for good cops. (I assume a majority are good cops.) However, the Fitzgerald Inquiry, unlike the Wood Royal Commission in NSW and the Mullighan Inquiry in SA, had results. Some cops were offered immunity for ’fessing up, and it worked. Many of the baddies found themselves in jail.

The title of the book All Fall Down refers to the fact that Jo Bjelke Petersen’s National Party fell out of power as a result of the Fitzgerald Inquiry, and the Police Commissioner Sir Lewis went to prison. Author Matthew Condon credits the following persons for helping:

*Phil Dickie, author of exposés for the Courier-Mail,

*Peter Vassallo, a dedicated anti-corruption cop in ABCI,

*Ross Dickson (“the Sheriff of Mareeba”), who got transferred to Townsville as he knew too much,

*Chris Masters who produced “The Midnight State” for ABC’s Four Corners program that engendered the Inquiry!

*Lorelle Saunders, a policewoman who was wrongly jailed for a murder, to get her out of circulation,

*Des Sturgess of the Office of Public Prosecutor,

*Bill Gunn, Deputy Premier who called for Inquiry when Bjekle-Petersen was out-of-state,

*Tony Fitzgerald, QC, who ran the Inquiry, and gave homilies,

*Nigel Powell, Licensing Branch cop — and other good cops.

The Corruption Is Purposeful!

It has often been argued that the original purpose of the no-alcohol laws in USA (during “Prohibition” 1918-1933) was to create a structure of police corruption. In any country where people want something that is forbidden by law – drugs, gambling, prostitution (before all of these became legalized in recent decades), folks would nonetheless procure them.  Since this invited arrest, there had to be a system of police payoffs.

A cop would look the other way, so to speak, as long as the owner of the brothel or casino “did the right thing.”  It’s important to get cops contaminated in this way. They will feel closer to the system of bribery and they now know they can’t do any dobbing or they might end up being indicted themselves.

In the US, the presence of Police Benevolent Associations is essential to keeping this system of “job security” intact. Members of the PBA tend to be bullies who let everyone know there will be “consequences” if cops are charged with crime. I suspect cops are all scared of those bullies.  “Benevolent” association, my foot.

A Policeperson’s Right To Refuse

New South Wales Senior Constable Andrew Cooney has written an open letter to Police Commissioner Mike Fuller, warning that he and colleagues are not joyous about the prospect of enforcing more Covid-19 restrictions and potential vaccinations.  He wrote:

We feel a real calling to do our part to stop this oppression, so we are writing to you to raise the following issues:

  • Police Force employees have ‘choice’ as to whether or not to receive vaccines;
  • The Police believe that all members of the community also have choice around receiving vaccines;
  • Police do not participate in any way in the forcing of vaccines upon the population;
  • That the Police Association start preparing to defend Police employees who choose to not be vaccinated
  • To raise the alarm that there is a global dictatorship occurring and the Police Force is being used as a tool to push these global and corporate agendas upon the population; and
  • To warn the Police Force not to simply acquiesce to these requests, rules and laws and to act in the best interest of its population, not tyranny of government….

“We ask that you consider the information provided herein and the NSW Police Force statement of values: Each member of the Police Force is to Act in a manner which:

▪Places integrity above all;

▪Upholds the rule of law;

▪Preserves the rights and freedoms of individuals;

▪Seeks to improve the quality of life by community involvement in policing;

▪Strives for citizen and police personal satisfaction;

▪Ensures that authority is exercised responsibly.

Foreign Instructors?

It is a globalized world.  The Great Reset” (fancy that!) is being pushed by billionaires in the club known as The World Economic Forum, WEF, in Switzerland. Those top-dogs must know that there will be plenty of resistance from the people. They are counting on:

crooked judges,

dumb cops,

amazing weaponry,

food shortages,

slavish obedience by the citizenry.

Yes, I said dumb cops– policemen and policewomen who have been so brainwashed that they cannot see who is who in their organization.

The case that Dee McLachlan wrote up, about one particular little girl in SA. is but typical of cases in Norway, UK, US, and Oz, to name just four places that I have some knowledge of. There could never be such resemblance of practices by mere chance. There must be an integrated program run from the top.

Back to Officer Demeter and Detective Lemon. Who the hell are they working for? And, more interestingly, who the hell do they imagine they are working for? Do they have a clue about the international nature of child trafficking? Does the name Jeffrey Epstein ring a bell for them?


Wakie Uppie, Coppers

What on earth do Demeter and Lemon think is the value, to themselves or society, of taking a child from the mum – breaking the hearts of both – and lowering the reputation of police? Doesn’t Demeter worry about getting in trouble?  Is she aware of being used as a scapegoat in this case?

Do they know that many kids get “disposed of’? The Mullighan Inquiry in SA has left unfinished the search (non-search, I mean) for hundreds of kids unaccountably missing from the old Goodwood Orphanage. Should the search resume (I mean begin), some still-living persons may be charged with murder and accessory after the fact, e.g., coverup of the murders.

In the case Dee McLachlan is dealing with, there have been many, many court appearances by the mum, self- represented. (Money for a lawyer ran out a long time ago.) At each new hearing, one of the parties, usually the Department of Child Protection, comes up with some new “twist” as to what should happen. Invariably this leads to employees of DCP and SAPOL having to go deeper and deeper into lying and concealing evidence.

Does no one recall the law maxim Omnia praesumuntur, contra spoliatorem?  He/she who destroys or suppresses the evidence can be assumed guilty of the crime!

Corrupted public servants are “pilling it on” for themselves, seriously.

Dear Readers, your suggestions as to what to do will be appreciated.  Please don’t be too sardonic.  The child’s case is a real issue with real urgency.


Please follow and like us:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


Please help truthPeep spread the word :)