Loading ...- Category:
- Uncategorized
- Author:
- Staff Writers
- Posted:
- Tuesday, 20 October 2009
ANDREW M. POTTS
New Mardi Gras (NMG) has clocked close to 200 complaints over the “over-the-top” police presence at Sleaze this year.
In an email circular NMG co-chairs Nick Parker and Steph Sands said they would seek urgent meetings with police and politicians to ensure “more proportionate policing” at future events.
“Many of you are angry, not only as attendees of our parties, but also as Australian citizens who feel their rights are being eroded,” it stated.
“You raised particular concerns about the police conducting searches in very public areas, conducting searches without a reasonable level of suspicion and violating the privacy of the medical area. Such behaviour does not accord with the protocols agreed between New Mardi Gras and Police NSW.”
Partygoers were made to run a gauntlet of sniffer dogs and heavy rain to enter the party. Dogs were taken into the venue and on to the dancefloor.
According to witnesses, police strip searched some people in public areas while others were taken to a shed.
Surry Hills LAC’s Supt Donna Adney said she did not believe public searches occurred. But one person searched in the shed told Sydney Star Observer he was asked to remove his clothes in a public area and was only taken to the shed when he refused.
Supt Adney said the individual was not subjected to a body cavity search.
People were also strip searched in a disabled toilet, a police van, and in another shed on site.
Parker said he followed a team of seven officers and a dog for 45 minutes.
“I saw a number of people questioned and detained and led away for searches [but] did not see the dog sit down once,” he said. “In most cases the police that were following people reached out to patrons to question them before the dog gave any indication that seemed to be consistent with a detection.”
Police confirmed 33 people were searched on the night, with 17 charged with drug possession.
“Over-zealous policing has the potential to undermine one of the key events in the NSW calendar,” the NMG email stated. “Because of this we intend to initiate a number of initiatives to seek more proportionate policing in the future, while reaffirming our zero tolerance to intoxication, substance use or other illegal activities.”
THE FULL MESSAGE FROM NMG TO MEMBERS
Message from Nick and Steph
Thank you to the many of you who took part in the Sleaze Ball survey. Well over seven hundred completed it and overall we were delighted with the results.
Your responses clearly identified areas that we have to work on, but the headline figures are very encouraging with 43% saying they thought the party was very good and 41% saying it was good.
Respondents had the opportunity to write in further comments about the party and we received several hundred of these. Approximately half related to the police presence at the party.
This comes as no surprise. Both on the night and in the days that followed the party a major focus of the feedback we received was about the policing of the event, the presence of sniffer dogs on the dance floors and what many of you felt were quite arbitrary searches of our patrons.
Over and over you told us that you felt the police presence was an “invasion of privacy”, “intimidating”, “intrusive” and “over the top”. Your comments make clear that many of you are angry, not only as attendees of our parties, but also as Australian citizens who feel their rights are being eroded and as taxpayers who feel they are witnessing a misallocation of police resources.
You raised particular concerns about the Police conducting searches in very public areas, conducting searches without a reasonable level of suspicion and violating the privacy of the medical area. Such behaviour does not accord with the protocols agreed between New Mardi Gras and Police NSW.
More broadly it is clear that the Police’s increased presence both outside and inside the party is having a major impact on our audience’s enjoyment of this and other events. We make every effort at our parties to create a fantasy world, a place for people to relax and have fun. To have sombre-faced officers in reflective clothing roaming around the dance floor with sniffer dogs clearly makes our task much more difficult.
This is a major issue for New Mardi Gras. Sleaze Ball – like Mardi Gras Party and the Mardi Gras harbour party – are fundraising events for the Sydney Gay & Lesbian Mardi Gras. Any impact on ticket sales to these events has a very direct impact on our ability to sustain the Parade, the Mardi Gras Season and organisation as a whole.
Over-zealous policing has the potential to undermine one of the key events in the NSW calendar and one that brings in an estimated $30 million new dollars into the state through overseas and interstate visitation each and every year.
Because of this we intend to initiate a number of initiatives to seek more proportionate policing in the future, whilst reaffirming our zero tolerance to intoxication, substance use or other illegal activities.
We will be raising our concerns in a number of quarters, with our senior police contacts, with the Office of the Lord Mayor, with Events NSW and the Premiers Department representatives we liaise with as a NSW Hallmark event. We will also ask our members and patrons to share their views and experiences with those bodies and their members of parliament.
We have already commenced discussions with community health, legal and rights bodies and we will work with them closely to form a united community front on this issue and instigate additional programs to assure the highest levels of safety and protection for our community at our events.
We will establish a program to ensure our rights are well understood and respected, and we will endeavour to provide volunteers with legal expertise at our events to ensure that members and guests are fully aware of their rights if confronted with intimidating or over-zealous handling by police.
We will also raise the bigger question about the cost and benefit of operations like this. Was the commitment of taxpayer dollars to enforcement at Sleaze Ball worth the 18 minor personal possession offences reportedly recorded?
The Police themselves came out last week to say that Sleaze Ball “was probably the highlight of the night, where behaviour was concerned.” We will be asking the Police to match this behaviour with less intrusive police operations based on the presumption of innocence of our patrons and a respect for our rights and for published protocols.
Finally, if you would like to volunteer your legal or other skills to assist in this rights protection initiative, or wish to share your experience of policing at our parties or elsewhere around the world please email us atfeedback@mardigras.org.au.
Steph and Nick, on behalf of the NMG Board
October 21st, 2009 @ 6:51 am
Wow 33 people searched and 17 charged with drug possession,that says it all doesn’t it.
October 21st, 2009 @ 8:46 am
Whatever the excesses on the night, the reality is drug sniffing dogs will be at dance parties (straight and gay)in the future.
NMG might be able to get more reasonable behaviour, but party goers should not think that means the removal of drug sniffer dogs.
October 21st, 2009 @ 8:46 am
Yes, but look at it from the other point of view, that’s 50% of INNOCENT people who were subjected to such searches. what kind of police state are we living in these days? the 78ers would be appalled that we’re taking this lying down.
October 21st, 2009 @ 12:29 pm
Yes, overzealous Policing has caused medical problems in the past too… People panicking and swallowing their entire weekend’s supply that then end up being carted out at the start of the party by Ambulance.
While I can’t condone their possession of small quantities of ecstacy or similar, these people weren’t drug dealers – just simple party goers..
The principles of Drug Harm Minimisation in this country are to tackle (1) supply reduction, (2) demand reduction, and (3) harm reduction … Did the police bust any big time dealers in their efforts to make the party deeply unpleasant for patrons? Did they have any effect on demand or harm? Or did they (as has happened at prior gay parties) cause more harm than good by going overboard?
It’s a shame that Sydney Police don’t have an incident like Melbourne’s Tasty Nightclub class lawsuit in their past to help temper their over-the-top approach to things.. What/who are they really out to get?…
October 21st, 2009 @ 1:37 pm
If people stopped taking drugs it wouldn’t be a problem.
they are illegal after all!
October 21st, 2009 @ 2:29 pm
Peter “they are illegal after all”
so was homosexuality in NSW UNTIL 1984!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
October 21st, 2009 @ 2:35 pm
What everyone has to realize is that, Police are only trying to make it safer for the general public, If you didn’t have the police there you would end up with a situation where you would have the dealer’s there selling, people taking more drugs than what they would normally take.
Simple, If you don’t like the police there doing their job, don’t go.
Realistically Everyone Has OPTIONS
October 21st, 2009 @ 3:37 pm
DRUGS are illegal…so if you get caught thats LIFE .
Silly Queens…if the police dont get you, the overdose will.
LOL
p.s. Im so over dumb drug fucked Queens bitching at the police.
October 21st, 2009 @ 4:16 pm
Spray bong water around the venue and grounds the day before… that’ll fk the dogs up. Worked on trains in San Fran.
October 21st, 2009 @ 5:04 pm
I am aware of someone who was not only strip searched, without the dog sitting down, in a public area, with people walking though who was also subject to a cavity search!
possibly due to his miss understanding of his rights and the over zealous actions or distortion of perception of those rights by NSW Police.
Last time I checked, you must have a court order to preform a cavity search unless at an airport, and even then it must be conducted after an initial X-Ray, BY A MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL in the privacy of a hospital!
Some untrained officer could cause physical harm just getting up to the elbows and having a fish around (no pun intended)
October 21st, 2009 @ 6:02 pm
Drew… You silly queen..
‘.DRUGS are illegal…so if you get caught thats LIFE ‘.
and i repeat…so was homosexuality in NSW until 1984!!!!!!
October 21st, 2009 @ 6:10 pm
If you are stupid enough to take drugs to the party,then expect that you may get searched and arrested. If you swallow your whole supply to avoid getting arrested – that’s your own stupid fault. Stop whining and complaining like a bunch of victims and take responsibility for your own actions. The police have a job to do, let them do it. We should ask ourselves as a community why we need to involve drugs and alcohol to such an extent in our culture in-order to have fun.
October 21st, 2009 @ 6:56 pm
Police aren’t stupid you know,They know who would be a hot candidate for a drug search so they only did their job by weeding the suss looking ones.
Personally I couldn’t give a Shit who,s on drugs (Especially Ice) then they have un-protected sex after a major dance party as Most gay men do.
Its people who drive after the major party’s home while high on Cloud 9 that are giving the gay community a bad name.Also the dickheads who O>D Why should the Doctors at ST.VINCENTS waste their time on them? Why should my taxes be being spent on these Rejects Of Society? If they want to pop pills all night while mixing it with Booze turning themselves into time-bombs gawd go dance in the traffic instead.
Thanks
October 21st, 2009 @ 7:03 pm
Mark, I would very much like to speak to this person that you are aware of being cavity searched and am happy to guarantee their anonymity if that’s what it takes. My email is apotts “at” starobserver.com.au
October 21st, 2009 @ 8:47 pm
–> “Silly Queens…if the police dont get you, the overdose will. LOL p.s. Im so over dumb drug fucked Queens bitching at the police.”
I’m so over bigoted homo-phobes, but I guess we all have to tolerate some things in life, don’t we?… :-(
October 21st, 2009 @ 10:25 pm
i was arrested at sleaze for a pill.
nmg supplied the search area inside the party and facilitated the arrests of its own members. the supplied area was there apparently to be monitored according to nmg. it was not
nmg now reckon they have a zero tolerance policy as advised in their enewsletter. it is not readily available on the site (ie if you find it, please post it) and repeated requests for this policy have not been responded too. no request for the policing for sleaze that was advised by nmg to me to be on their site is to be found, nmg 3 weeks later are yet to supply the links to this on their site. nmg advise it is part of the ticketing, reqeusts for this link are yet to be responded to.
the police, illegally, took my sleaze ticket, on advice they said from nmg. nmg say this is not their policy. it is yet to be reported anywhere that this is what police did. nmg are yet to apologise in any way for this ‘confusion’
i witnessed strip searches, threats of cavity searches, we were not allowed to comfort other arrestees, all police were without ID visible, my friend taken off and strip searched in a disabled toilet near the hidden police van outside the party. response from mardi gras to this advice from me? nil.
the problem is two fold. 1 prohibition and 2 the current nmg silence on anything specific related to my arrest
thankyou chris for your response, we were all once illegal. in uganda it is illegal to be homosexual. does that mean drew that it is wrong?
questions: when did mardi gras adopt zero tolerance? why do they appear to be so disinterested in those arrested?
Supt Adney is wrong, ill informed, or lying. I had to request not to be searched in full view of all patrons.
Lies from Police, and silence from mardi gras to requests simply for information.
a less than happy sleaze.
here’s a challenge, email mardi gras and ask them for their zero tolerance policy. if you get a response, send it to sso editor to print.
October 21st, 2009 @ 11:03 pm
@Corey: I was searched without reasonable cause at Inquisition and the police found no illegal substances. As a result of this unjustified and humiliating police behaviour who are just “doing their job” I didn’t go to Sleaze and will not go to future big gay parties. I imagine a lot of other people who police have no reason to search will also stop going. How many big gay parties do you think we will have then?
October 21st, 2009 @ 11:34 pm
Here we go again…its such an easy target to bump up police statistics.. go to a dance party and find people with a tablet.OH and sorry use a dog to make it look really good.What a joke!!And what a waste of our taxpayers money.And whats even more of a joke is the police numbers at these gay and lesbian events(see Inquisition et al)What an easy and fun night,lets watch the queens carry on and arrest a few.PLEASE.Where are you NSW police when things are a bit hard to investigate like..um burglary..um assaults,um gay hate crimes on Oxford street um just round the corner from your police station.What a disgrace.GO do your jobs properly like everyone else.Sorry but thats maybe thats just too much hard work.
October 21st, 2009 @ 11:56 pm
And whats more NMG should not be accepting/inviting the NSW police into the MG parade until they can stop their appalling behaviour towards the G+L community.We are not living in Nazi Germany you know.Perhaps when NMG do something useful and make a stand we will be able to go forward with G+L rights.We supposedly have the biggest gay festival in the world here,well some good its done.You want me to start naming the countries that have gay marriage like 5 years ago.Again NMG start doing your job properly,take a stand for once and maybe we will see some proper progress.
October 22nd, 2009 @ 12:00 am
For the record, I do not drink or take drugs, but I do take my civil rights seriously.
As a law abiding citizen going peacefully about my business I resent the idea of being stopped and subjected to an invasive search by the Police. What is this, Nazi era Germany? Where does it stop, am I soon to be subjected to interrogation on suspicion of having ‘unaustralian’ thoughts?
The violations of civil rights described above are grossly disproportionate to the danger presented to the community by recreational drug users.
An independent review of drug sniffer dog searches conducted a couple of years ago determined that 74% of such searches turned out to be false detections. That’s 74% innocent people subjected to an invasive search for no reason. Absolutely outrageous.
The State Government ought to cease using the Police as a cheap tool to win votes from the excitable masses and focus on actually governing NSW properly (public transport anyone)?
October 22nd, 2009 @ 12:10 am
If you need drugs to have a good time then there is something not right.
October 22nd, 2009 @ 1:49 am
This is the very reason WHY I didn’t go to Sleaze!As a performer at Inquisition this year, I was horrified by the Police presence that night. For about 3 hours they were there. Not everyone was searched because of the dogs. If your look that night appeared to be “out of it” then u were stopped as well. We wanted to go 2 Phoenix Rising but the dog squad went there too and equally obnoxious if not worse??? There was a straight music/dance party also held recently to Sleaze with alot more people. Did they get the same treatment? The same ratio of police? An example … Sleaze Party – 1,000 [one thousand] people, 50 Police 10 Dogs DOES Straight party/concert – 10,000 [ten thousand] people have 500 Police 1,000 dogs??? Do we have a landmark case of Discrinination based on sexual Orientation and Sexual Preference? Something to Ponder
October 22nd, 2009 @ 2:17 am
My 2 friends (each male, over 40, mature responsible party goers, experienced & loyal MG members-been going to Sleaze&Mardi Gras for 30 years) were each charged with possession of a pill. Apart from the charge – what really hurt them was that Mardi Gras appeared to join in this action with the police (who were unnecessarily harsh & aggressive – one of my friends was taken to a disabled toilet, locked in with 2 officers & roughly searched) – to the extent that the NSW police then CONFISCATED their Sleaze tickets ON BEHALF OF MARDI GRAS! So they were denied entry to the party (one of them having flown up from Melb that afternoon to be there). The police had no right to take the tickets unless they were acting on behalf of MG. The police told my 2 friends they had Mardi Gras’ authority to take their tix so that they lost their pill, were charged with a crime & then denied entry to a party they had paid to attend. So put to one side the police presence – did Mardi Gras enter an agreement nominating the NSW police as its agent in relation to ticketing or entry matters? If so, will they do so again? (maybe we’ll soon be able to buy our MG tickets from the local police station!). If not, is MG concerned to hear that NSW police have been acting as MG rep’s?! Will MG do something about this situation? My friends complaints to MG have fallen on deaf ears. They feel betrayed & sold out by an organisation they thought was supposed to support them. They’ve also been advised that MG has changed its drug policy from ‘harm-minimisation’ to ‘zero tolerance’. If this so, when was this policy introduced, what was the process of consultation with members, why is this not being publicised & where can members obtain a copy?
October 22nd, 2009 @ 9:47 am
If you were searched by police and you weren’t in possession of drugs then don’t blame the police. blame the people WHO TAKE DRUGS! The police aren’t there without realiable information! That’s like blaming the alarm company for you having to install an alarm in your house! it’s not their fault it’s the person breaking in and stealing things. And to equate “illegal” drug taking to “illegal” homosexuality is abit absurd and insulting to many people quite frankly. People take drugs to get out of it. Can’t say the same thing about people who are born gay.
October 22nd, 2009 @ 12:38 pm
I one accidently stepped on a sniffer dogs tail when it was sitting down. I show no remorse and I actually wish I stepped on it harder. Stupid Mutt. I prefer cats insted.
October 22nd, 2009 @ 1:07 pm
Do drugs expect to get busted.
Gyas are no different to anyone else.
October 22nd, 2009 @ 1:22 pm
I’m not, and never have been, into drugs but to me the all those police resources (think of the overtime costs alone) to catch 17 people with a pill or two seem way over the top.
October 22nd, 2009 @ 1:42 pm
@ Andrew Potts
I have passed on your details to my friend, in the hopes that he wishes to contact you directly.
Hope this helps.
October 22nd, 2009 @ 1:45 pm
To equate “illegal” drug taking to “illegal” home invasion and theft is abit absurd and insulting to many people quite frankly.
Why do I need an “alarm” in my house (to follow your metaphor) to protect me from other people taking actions affecting only themselves?
If thieves only robbed their own houses then yes, I would blame the alarm company for having to install an alarm in my own house.
October 22nd, 2009 @ 1:51 pm
It is obvious that the global war on drugs does not stop people from consuming illegal substances and sure you can vilify the illegal ones, but regardless of legal status, any substance can be prone to abuse.
Anna Wood is a good example of a victim of this war, she is a victim of a lack of proper education (she died from cerebral edema – water intoxication which most likely could have been prevented through appropriate hydration), and she is a victim of a legal system which deterred her friends from seeking medical attention in a timely fashion due to their fear of prosecution.
The focus should be on harm minimisation and education about responsible usage, coincidentally, this was one of the recommendations made by the coroner’s report on Anna’s death.
Some other things to note:
Portugal decriminalised all personal drugs in 2001 and studies have now shown that rates of overdose and HIV and been reduced dramatically.
The Netherlands has a lower than average rate of drugs use than many other countries in the EU and drug related deaths are lower that the EU mean. They have lower rates of usage in all categories than the US.
Mexico, Argentina, Peru, Uruguay and Venezuela provide a few more examples of this kind of reform.
I wish the Australian government would examine these models and stop blindly implementing policy that causes more social harm than good in the misguided belief that I need to be saved from myself.
October 22nd, 2009 @ 2:17 pm
Yes Tina, Drug takers only hurt themselves. Keep telling yourself that. And while you are at it, don’t become a doctor, nurse or drug counsellor you might get abit of a rude shock.
October 22nd, 2009 @ 2:41 pm
John, 98% of drug deaths in Australia are due to alcohol/tobacco. In 1980 (the year of the Justice E. S. Williams Royal Commission on Drugs) the Federal Department of Health figures on death due to drugs were:
Narcotics 90, barbiturates 280, alcohol 3600, alcohol related 1829, road alcohol 3478, (total alcohol 8907), tobacco 16,200. Similar figures have occurred every year since.
Even in the drug ravaged U.S.A. in 1985 the deaths due to alcohol/tobacco were 400,000 relative to only 3562 due to ALL the illegal drugs COMBINED.
If you want to talk crime, non-fatal incidents, and costs to our health care system, the statistics are out there and very similar to those above.
October 22nd, 2009 @ 3:41 pm
Imspartacus, are you seriously suggesting the drug policies of Mexico and Peru are a good model for Australia??
Methinks they have more to do with drug growers and utterly corrupt police forces than good social policy.
And in the other countries you mention – Venezuala, Uruguay and Portugal – none of these are nation’s known for pioneering drug rehabilitation and treatment centres.
At its heart, does our community really need more drugs and alcohol?
October 22nd, 2009 @ 4:46 pm
Tina….well said !! the police resources out at the showgrounds for Sleaze should have been directed to the feral mobs creating havoc on Oxford st fueled by the legal drug alcohol!
October 22nd, 2009 @ 6:32 pm
Straight festivals such as Big Day Out, Splendour in the Grass and Vibes all had drug sniffer dogs present – and the website for Splendour includes explicit warnings about dogs and the confiscation of tickets.
Them doggies are kept busy. And while they certainly shouldn’t be in the medical area, and police should not be publicly strip searching people, NMG ain’t gonna be able to bargain on the presence or numbers of dogs.
October 22nd, 2009 @ 6:41 pm
Tina, its great that you are using statistics from two decades ago, but unformately drug ‘deaths’ arent the only misery drugs inflict on people. Go along to NA or even AA to hear peoples regrets for their drug induced actions.
October 22nd, 2009 @ 10:46 pm
You pack of whining bitches. You make me sick, making comments about “Nazi Germany”… you wouldn’t have the slightest idea what it’s like to live in a world like that. Get over yourselves. The law says that “recreational” drugs are illegal, and the cops do what they can, with the limited resources available to them, to minimise the harm done by every one of you dicks who drop at every party we have. That’s just the way it is! If you don’t like it, get out from behind your keyboard and make a change, and stop whining every time someone else gets your back up about it, five days later. And to the person who says they were “cavity searched”? You’re a flat out LIAR, and I DARE you to bring your story to the Ombudsman. No? Can’t trust “the man”? How convenient. You embarrass me as a member of the GLBTI community. Harden up, or shut the hell up.
October 22nd, 2009 @ 10:57 pm
…and it would also be nice if SSO actually reported fairly on the response they got from the police. Maybe then you’d all have a less biased view on things. Perhaps if you knew that of the other 16 people who were searched without finding drugs on them, 11 of them freely admitted they’d either smoked a joint, or been with someone who had, just before they went to the party, it might make a little more sense that the dog indicated on them? No. I didn’t think they’d publish that. I doubt they’ll let this through either.
Editor’s Note: Thanks for the information Mac. We weren’t aware of the 11 people freely admitting to smoking the joint. Appreciate your’re telling us what must surely be information from inside NSW Police. Cheers.
October 23rd, 2009 @ 12:06 am
Merlot,John et al don’t try and get away from the fact that there were a ridiculous amount of dogs and police present at a number of G+L events in the past year.If you haven’t been to a party in the last while and are just armchair letter writers I suggest you get out a bit more.It certainly sounds as if it is the case.
As I have said before what an easy target for NSW police.Get your numbers up.See if the doggy can find the tablet.
Too bad of it turns out to be your HIV medication.Hope you have got your doctor’s note saying that you should be taking it.Or at least hope you are carrying the whole bottle with your name on it (see NMG/ACON et al policy advice for parties)
WHAT A TOTAL JOKE!! WHAT A COMPLETE INVASION OF PRIVACY!!
NO indeed they should not be in the medical area,NO indeed they should not be publicly strip searching people.
YES NMG can say what they want and don’t want.If it means the police don’t march in the parade,if it means NMG take a stand(for once) and dare I say it cancel MG so be it.
This total invasion of people’s privacy has just gone too far.
October 23rd, 2009 @ 5:38 am
STUPID queens. Drugs are ILLEGAL and the cops are doing their jobs!!!!!
October 23rd, 2009 @ 6:51 am
thanks rose for your insightful and insulting addition to the discussion
25 years ago when we were all illegal and we were being arrested for homosexuality your post would have said ’stupid poofs, homosexuality is illegal and cops are doing their jobs’.
and could you address the nsw police covering up all ID at sleaze, publicly searching, strip searching, threatening and possible performing cavity searches on those not carrying any drugs, and the debate that rages over whether sniffer dogs are a search without probable cause, a basic tenet of our laws and the low success rate of arrrest versus $ invested while other non-victimless crimes rage in nsw?
maybe something from you about cops NOT doing their jobs ?. or perhaps NMG not advising patrons of their zero tolerance policy and the silence since sleaze in any way specific to their arrested members? i challenge YOU to request a copy from MG of their stated zero tolerance policy and the agreed policing protocols with police because they wont respond at this point. Perhaps you could get me information from MG about police confiscating sleaze tickets which is against the law. or about MG facilitating the arrest of its own members with a supposedly monitored (unmonitored) strip search shed inside the party.
i look forward to your response to what people should be doing worldwide where homosexuality is illegal…in arresting these people would your defence of police be that “homosexuality is illegal and cops are just doing their jobs”?
i look forward to your detailed response Rose, of more substance than insults and lots of CAPITAL LETTERS
and Merlot, thanks for the info on Splendour. If Slpendours website can have this information, why cant the NMG site and why doesnt it? Please contact NMG and ask and get back to us all with the information. I bet you will be met with some deafening silnce
October 23rd, 2009 @ 7:27 am
I attended the party. I’m from the United States. I don’t take drugs, and had none on me, so that wasn’t the issue. The issue is that the dogs were all over the place. No reasonable suspicion. No nothing. I have to say that I was scared and it really ruined my evening.
Then I saw the dogs in Kings Cross a few days later. And then at a train station. It was very uncomfortable.
It’s a beautiful country, but I won’t be coming back.
Many of us hated Bush for what he did to civil liberties here (among other things). I suggest you watch your backs.
October 23rd, 2009 @ 8:11 am
I remember 10 or more years ago Police making a statement after Sleaze or the Mardi Gras Party saying how impressed tey were by the lack of violence and bad behaviour at our events and they attributed it to the fact people were on ecstacy and not alcohol…….we have gone backwards and this is a very slippery slope.
October 23rd, 2009 @ 8:33 am
Rose..you sound charming…are you a police officer yourself ?….you would be a good nazi storm trooper!!!!!!
October 23rd, 2009 @ 10:39 am
What do you expect? You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to know that drugs will be taken at these events whether straight or gay.
To suggest the police are targetting and dealing with the ILLEGAL issue just because it is a gay event is naive in the least and highly counter-productive in the extreme if we expect to be treated equally with others in society.
Drug taking is a choice, being gay isn’t. References to being gay when it was illegal being comparable is just stupid. Grow up and deal with it.
October 23rd, 2009 @ 2:34 pm
Everyone keeps confusing being gay and taking drugs. They aren’t the same thing. What is happening here is that a section of the gay community participate in a large event that is being inappropriately targeted by the police. It’s not the whole gay community that is being targeted so people should stop equating the whole gay community with drug use. The question is whether those parts of the gay community interested in these types of events are willing to allow them to be destroyed by police intimidation and harrassment. If you are not one of these people you should stop passing judgement about what is appropriate for these events and those who attend them.
There was not this kind of policing ten years ago and the legal context of drugs has remained the same. This tells us that something else has changed in NSW and that this form of policing is not an automatic extension of the prohibition of drugs. Decisions being made within the police are directing these actions. Those concerned should be writing to the Police Minister, the Premier and their state politicians objecting to this as these are the best people to be pressuring the police to adopt more appopriate practices. You should let them know that you intend to express your disapproval at the next election by voting for a party like the Greens who have a sensible drug policy. Many Labor parliamentarians are friendly (or need to be friendly) towards their gay and lesbian constituents.
NMG certainly needs to be standing up for its events and its members. The fact the state government has given NMG funding indicates it regards NMG events as important for the NSW economy. There is a clear argument that can be put forward in favour of protecting these events from declining. NMG also should stand up to the police in their pre-party negotiations.
Ultimately, NMG must resolve the huge contradiction in its claimed zero tolerance policy. If you have a medical tent (with staff familiar with drug-related presentations), sharps bins and volunteer drug rovers all present within the party, then you clearly don’t have a zero tolerance approach, putting aside the fact you are putting on an event that starts at 10pm and finishes at 8am which almost no one could physically endure without drugs. If the zero tolerance policy was for real NMG would logically have to search everyone attending the party in order to fulfil this policy, or indeed not even stage these events which are well known for and even necessitate drug use because of their scheduling.
October 23rd, 2009 @ 3:06 pm
Rose,Dave etc the problem is that the police are NOT doing their job.Just try and get a policeman to come around if you have had a burglary.Maybe it will take a day or two if you’re lucky.But they are quite happy to have huge resouces,dogs etc trying to find a few pills at a dance party.What a joke.
And yes it has everything to do with being gay.The past year and more G+L parties have been targetted with ridiculous numbers of police and sniffer dogs.I don’t see anyone being bashed nearly to death,assualted,abused verbally,harassed at a G+L dance party.Have you?
Yet we have a police station within metres of Oxford street and guess what all these things occur there.Not to mention elsewhere in the state.Yes we are queens Rose but we are not stupid.This is excately the type of behaviour I am talking about.You don’t offer anything to this argument except stupid abuse which is what the NSW are guilty of too.
October 23rd, 2009 @ 3:08 pm
NSW police
October 23rd, 2009 @ 6:01 pm
regarding the quote from Dave “Drug taking is a choice, being gay isn’t” i would say while homo desire is not a choice, acting ON that homosexual desire certainly IS a choice.
Whether desiring drugs may or not be a choice, acting on the desire is.
In this way the similarities are there between the two experiences, similarities between us once being homo illegal and acting on our desires is the same for drug illegal and acting on our desires. This is the explanation of the comparison that many are making
I think this covers it
October 23rd, 2009 @ 9:38 pm
Just wondering if we have a figure on how many people were “subjected to” a Random Breath Test on the way home, and how many were charged with drink driving.
I know of 2 people who were arrested and/or charged that weekend (neither were at Sleaze).One for possession and another for drink driving.
Both ran the risk of hurting themselves and others. Both will have to attend a local court.
I have symapthy for both of them, however there have been countless advertisements and news stories advising against both.
Tradition dictates that the gay press and countless readers must jump on the anti sniffer dog bandwagon.
I doubt we’ll ever see the same in regards to Random Breath Tests.
To me they are both the same, both are just some of the law enforcement tools the police use for catching people breaking the law.
The only real difference is that alcohol is legal, as is driving, the problems start when you combine the two.
I’m never outraged when i get pulled over for a breath test, nor am I too concerned when the sniffer dogs walk around my table at one of the suburban pubs I go to in Sutherland, Revesby or Bankstown (it’s not just gay venues). Mainly because I don’t break the law.
I reckon if you truly want to campaign against sniffer dogs, then it stands to reason you must also campaign against random breath testing.
Of course the latter is a nonsense. RBT’s have become a vital part of road safety. Over time I hope we’ll start to see sniffer dogs in the same light.
October 23rd, 2009 @ 10:22 pm
A police and government education program on the dangers of drug use in and affecting our GLBT community would probably be more effective than sniffer dogs at GLBT events in the long run. I have noticed over the years that drug use seems to be getting worse and worse.
October 23rd, 2009 @ 11:06 pm
how many people actually go to sleaze and do not take drugs??? there seem to be a few judging by the comments on here, but they could not possibly be in the majority.
would there even be a sleaze ball without drug-taking-revelers?? seriously, NMG know that, i know that and y’all know that.
i recall seeing 2 officers on the night, on the edge of the dance floor in the horden, who were “standing guard” over patrons trying to have fun despite the presence of these guards … most of these patrons were all wide eyed and clenched jaws. i commented to my friend that i bet these cops were looking at these people around them and thinking “how the hell did all this lot get their effing drugs in??!!”
there are no parties without drugs.
take the drugs away, you take the patrons away. take the patrons away, you have no party.
that is the reality.
the massive police presence was a real downer.
October 24th, 2009 @ 6:15 am
Peter, you insist somehow G+L events are being singled out.
But sniffer dogs have been equally active at straight events – that is fact.
So please, stop repeating the “gay people are victims” complaint.
And your call to actually cancel the entire Mardi Gras in protest is ridiculous!
G+L issues are things like adoption rights, marriage rights, universal anti-discrimination laws.
Demanding the right to take drugs whenever and wherever we want is not a gay and lesbian issue.
October 24th, 2009 @ 10:21 am
Merlot.Once again you MISS the point.And you need to get out more and see things.NO drugs and when you want to take them etc is not a G+L issue.But the huge police presence etc at a G+L event which is out of proportion to that of other straight events is a G+L issue.When Oxford street is not safe and people have been bashed/abused for being G+L.Yes this is a G+L issuse.It would be far more useful to have resources going into other areas than wasting money on ‘dance party dogs’and the like. And yes if it takes NMG to take some sort of stand would be nice instead of pathetic agreement with whatever the NSW police say.Cancelling MG is certainly one of them.
October 24th, 2009 @ 12:52 pm
Thanks Merlot for the exclusive list of what is and isnt a G + L Issue. I see beyond and including these issues to include the right to take drugs, without harm to others. It is called self determination.
Nan, many Sleaze patrons would have taken their drugs before entering the party, harm maximisation at its hardest. Those arrested in the main entered after the rain, when we dribbled in in twos and threes and there were more police and sniffer dogs than there were patrons entering the party.
Alex, there is a differnce between RBT and sniffer dogs. RBT tests the level of alcohol in a drivers system, and correlates this to the persons capacity to drive. They also test to detect any illegal drugs in the system, but this is in no way related to the persons capacity to drive, the merest evidence is apparently enough. There is no testing for prescription drugs in a drivers system and how that relates to the persons capacity to drive. The correlation to sniffer dogs at Sleaze would be that RBT sniffed out whether you had a bottle of alcohol in the car (eg an E in your pocket). Sniffer dogs do not test what is in your system as RBT does, and they do not relate this to your capacity to dance at the event. RBT and sniffer dogs are in no way similar.
I would not support drink driving or drug driving. I would condone drug dancing however, which threatens no one.
October 24th, 2009 @ 2:31 pm
The Western Australian government has introduced legislation which would enable police officers to stop and search any citizen without the need to rely on a reasonable suspicion of wrongdoing.
http://larvatusprodeo.net/2009/10/23/of-pimps-prostitutes-dealers-and-freedom-guest-post-by-rewi-lyall/
I wonder how long before Rees will adopt this in NSW as part of a Laura Norder campaign leading up to the next election?
I wonder what happened to freedoms in Australia and why did we let it get to this point?
October 25th, 2009 @ 9:28 am
Community Journalism is here people, All of us have cellphones with camperas. The police need to be photographed or better yet recorded when they stop you. It is your legal right to record everything if you are stopped. Especially if your going to be searched. Fight back with publicity. If you see anyone being stopped at a party and searched help out by filming the incident then post it it online. They can stop one person filming not 5 or ten. Record all incidents in clubs and bars and post them online. If the cops are being fair they will not mind being filmed, they should encourage it. Don’t be a victims, be transparent.
October 25th, 2009 @ 10:37 am
Dave, Could you please contact me. Perhaps Andrew Potter could forward you my email address. I would love to catch up and chat about this stuff over a coffee. I was one of the people searched and invaded at Slease. I really appreceated your support and letters.
cheers
Diana
October 26th, 2009 @ 9:43 am
seems to me like the police have started a comment-making campaign. poor sensitive souls
October 26th, 2009 @ 11:36 am
ok Mardi Gras what is it…Harm minimalisation policy =
drug rovers , medical tent, no drug
detection dogs
or… zero tolerance =
which would mean
no drug rovers, no medical tent
drug detection dogs
you can’t have it both ways!!!
October 26th, 2009 @ 12:13 pm
Azhar has got a point. Let’s not forget this Oxford St incident earlier this year:
http://www.smh.com.au/national/police-inquiry-into-stun-gun-shooting-in-city-20090614-c7fu.html
October 26th, 2009 @ 7:23 pm
And dont forget the police operation at The Phoenix the week before Sleaze when they raided the women’s toilets…forcing one woman to ‘empty’ her bra (nothing in there) and verbally abusing her by telling her that she might look pretty on her driver’s licence, but she certainly doesn’t look pretty now.. I mean WTF!
The police recently acknowledge that alcohol was the biggest problem on weekends so why are they still using sniffer dogs? Intimidation, harrassment and power tripping come to mind.
October 26th, 2009 @ 9:02 pm
hi diana
andrew potts has been given permission to give you my email form which we can make contact
or
i will see you tomorrow at downing street
and azhar
i understand from sydneycopwatch that it is illegal to photograph police officers conducting their ‘duty’
am confused as to what i can and cannot legally do
and i didnt carry my mobile to sleaze to photography anything, supt adney has already said she doesnt believe the strip searching, which i saw, not sure where to take this in terms of complaint about police behaviour, if i complain to ombudsman it is investigated (i understand) by the police station itself, ie the perpertators investigate themselves.
email mardi gras and ask them to investigate ?
david
October 27th, 2009 @ 12:47 pm
Alex, I know you are trying to be evenhanded but it is a little difficult to see how your friend charged with possession presented a risk to others in any way analogous to the friend who was drink-driving. Perhaps more to the point, I think we all understand how RBT reduces harm to individuals and the community.
RBT is widely accepted as necessary and proportionate because it is effective and involves only minimal inconvenience and violation of rights and privacy. No personal search is involved. I don
October 27th, 2009 @ 12:48 pm
Alex, I know you are trying to be evenhanded but it is a little difficult to see how your friend charged with possession presented a risk to others in any way analogous to the friend who was drink-driving. Perhaps more to the point, I think we all understand how RBT reduces harm to individuals and the community.
RBT is widely accepted as necessary and proportionate because it is effective and involves only minimal inconvenience and violation of rights and privacy. No personal search is involved. I don
October 27th, 2009 @ 1:58 pm
Dave,
Here’s the page on photographing police. It’s not illegal, but it can be bloody dangerous:
http://www.sydneycopwatch.org/photographing-police.html
One thing mentioned on that page that should be rigourlessly enforced is that police who do not wear their name badges etc should be subject to disciplinary action.
October 27th, 2009 @ 5:26 pm
Chris,
Chris, It’s not impossible to have a harm minimalisation policy which includes drug rovers, a medical tent AND drug detection dogs. In fact I reckon it makes more sense.
A person taking drugs and/or excessive alcohol cannot guarantee their behaviour, therefore they pose a risk to others.
I’m old enough to recall the public outcry and bleating about civil liberties when RBT’s were introduced.
This ranting about sniffer dogs is very reminiscent of those times. Would be interesting to compare the comments from then to now.
October 28th, 2009 @ 5:57 pm
Alex… re your comments, you must have misread my post.
in it i said a harm minimalisation poicy DOES include
drug rovers , medical tent, no drug
detection dogs.
October 28th, 2009 @ 6:01 pm
i do believe drug detection dogs work against harm minimalisation as it encourages/compels people to take all their drugs at once …this practice is highly dangerous and can result in death as was the tragic case in Perth last year.
November 3rd, 2009 @ 11:57 pm
I am from Melbourne and I love coming up for weekends, having a good time, meeting friends. I love the big parties and dont even mind police presence but i have noticed it’s getting bigger each year. The party loses its flavour when the police move through like swat teams. It’s becomes too stuffy and I dont want to be made feel like Im doing something wrong… I just wanna f*&%n dance!
November 13th, 2009 @ 10:30 pm
TO PETER, It may be a waste of tax payers money having the police and their dogs there, Bit it is a bigger waste of tax payers money having to send ambulance out to a venue because some drug affected overdosed. I think it is high time that the gay community stops feeling sorry for them selves and accept the law, I am sure that Police are at other big ( mixed people ) events doing the same job.
As to Chris’s comment, If the person in Perth didn’t have the drugs on them in the first place, they wouldn’t have had to swallow the whole lot at once.